LJ Idol Week 3 - Things One Should Care About: People in Other Countries

[aggienaut]

   If there's one thing I think people should care more about, but instead seem to have a shocking disregard for it is people in other countries.

   Sure people will always express a polite concern about the welfare of people in other countries, maybe even vaguely endorse policies or movements which they've taken a wild guess might help people in another country. But I found when it actually comes to seriously caring about them, people exhibit a shocking geographic discrimination.

   The most blatant example of this I think is during presidential elections, where for months you hear every day about both candidates stumping around about how they're gonna stop "us" from "losing american jobs!!" etc etc. And even outside the context of elections you hear people say that - losing American jobs to anyone in any other country is apparently always considered a tragedy.
   You see, if someone in Ohio loses their job to someone in Guatamala, all I ever hear is that thats an outrage. From politicians, from people in Ohio, from people here thousands of miles from Ohio.
   But the way I see it, someone in Ohio loses their job, three people in Guatamala gain jobs. That unemployed person in Ohio is probably STILL better off than the three people in Guatamala who now have better jobs than they did before.
   And so, I don't care if trade liberalization causes Americans to lose their jobs. And I submit that you too should consider people living outside your border to be just as human as those living within it.

Addressing the Excuses
   As I've run this argument past my friends, as I mentioned yesterday, nearly all of them balked at it. Lets explore some of the counter-arguments they raised:

(1) "Trade with oppresive regimes legitimizes them!!" was one I got from a number of my friends. And this is a convenient out that makes one feel really morally upright for not caring about people, but does it really make sense?
   First and foremost, do you know of any South American (those from elsewhere please bear with me on the focus on trade in the Americas, but it's the terms trade liberalization is usually talked about in here) regimes that are evil and oppressive offhand? I mean, yes there are certainly some sinister ones that come to mind in the past, and there's some now that have corruption problems or are otherwise less-than-optimal, but are any of them actually non-democratic? I think first and foremost this counterargument hinges upon a silly, inaccurate and patronizing idea of what life in South America is like.
   But furthermore, studies show* that democracy only flourishes when per capita GDP is higher than $5,000 per annum. Therefore the answer to helping oppressed people is not to refuse to have anything to do with them but rather support their economic development.

(2) "Yeah now those jobs are being done by people in sweatshops!" -- Yes human slavery does still exist and still do sweatshops. HOWEVER I know of no country, particularly in the Americas, where it's a regular part of the economy. People have a choice in what they do. If they're working in factories in conditions that we'd find deplorable or with a standard of living we'd find unacceptable, it's presumably because they didn't have better options. They chose to work at the factory because without the factory their options would be worse.
   I'm not saying we should call the situation all a-okay because of this logic, I believe everything possible to improve their conditions should still be done, I'm just saying that it's not because of free trade that their conditions are bad. And more to the point, because their conditions aren't optimum is absolutely not a justification for not wanting them to "take American jobs."

(3) "Hey I'M from Ohio!" objects hereticxxii at my use of Ohio as an example. "LOL but now you work in Korea" say I.

(4) "Well what if it was YOUR job that was taken overseas" Honestly I'm pretty sure if I got edged out by beekeepers in Mexico I'd feel the same way about it if I got edged out by beekeepers in Utah ("the Beehive State") or say that filthy squatter who set up his beehives on empty land not half a mile from our bees last week and the County has been dragging its feet on investigating. His bees are bad-tempered (one stung me in the ear while I was snooping around) and his practices unhygenic (leaving collapsed colonies side by side with healthy ones, is he TRYING to infect them all with something?!) ... but I digress.
   But yeah, if I lost my job I lost my job and blaming the guy that took it would just be focusing frustration in a wrong and negative direction.


What About Those Who Lost Their Jobs
   My main point here is that we shouldn't see Americans losing their jobs due to free trade causing those employment opportunities to move elsewhere as something deplorable, due to the fact that the people receiving those jobs are better off. But so as not to be completely insensitive to my fellow Americans, I thought I'd hit on why it's also better for America.
   The world is a better place when everyone is producing what they have a comparative advantange in producing. That is, everything is being produced by whomever it is most efficient for it to be produced by. The free market causes this to happen, and this is a good thing because it means there is more all around consumer goods being produced, meaning there is more for everyone to consume. To put it more simply, it's better for the economy.
   When we subvert free trade by trade barriers we keep our people happily doing stuff that they are not the best at producing. They may be happy, and if they're in a swing state the politicians will pander shamelessly to them, but they're not actually going to be producing as much as they would if economic restructuring were allowed to follow its natural course. Over time if we were to allow it to sit like this our economy would become increasingly backwards as it would fail to keep up with the global economy.
   Being unemployed sucks. Finding a new career can be daunting. However, these auto workers or factory workers who are losing their jobs DO presumably have the ability to do other things, and would presumably end up doing them if they had to.


In Conclusion
   In conclusion the fact that people care about the welfare and specifically employment status of people belonging to their own country infinitly more than they care about the same for people of a different country is an arbitrary discrimination. You should care just as much about the welfare of people in other countries and you shouldn't try to edge them out with protectionist trade policies.


* I wish I could remember my original source for this but I can't. But if you google for example "democracy $5,000 per capita" you get a number of references to it, including one from JSTOR that is surely a scholarly enough source to cite, but I no longer have JSTOR access /=

** Pictured at upper right: employees making use of gratuitous free space at the Budweiser factory I visited last week

See Also
The Making of Entry 3 - An outtake
Topic 3 Bonus Entry - Probably a better entry than this one!

Comments

[justkimu.livejournal.com]

Good writing-good entry.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks. (=

I'm bracing myself for some scathing arguments about it. If my own friends nearly all had trouble accepting the argument for one reason or another I'm sure the wider blogosphere will go wild with it d=

[y0ur-c0nscience.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with this entry, for it shares my views on the subject as well. People have little to no regard for other humans living outside of the lot of land they call home. They have more of a 'fuck everyone outside the perimeter' attitude, and it disgusts me. I mean, there really isn't much of a difference between people outside the borders of one country to another. You don't cross the concept of an imaginary line, and suddenly human beings become worthless.

[supremegoddess1.livejournal.com]

Very good points, good take on the topic.

[justkimu.livejournal.com]

Yes...the intarwebs is a alive with "oh no you didn't just write that" posts in the LJ Idol world. Even if a post isn't my cup of tea, I read it for what it is worth - following the prompt and being a good writer.

I like your point of view on the topic, and appreciate your thoughts. :)

[nationelectric.livejournal.com]

Good stuff.

[nationelectric.livejournal.com]

It's not just one imaginary line, either. People put themselves over their family, their family over their neighborhood, their neighborhood over their town, their town over their state, their state over their country. And that's without getting into religion or class or even hobbies, but the principle remains the same.

The farther removed someone is, the harder it is to take their concerns seriously. It's almost a failure of imagination, really.

[y0ur-c0nscience.livejournal.com]

I agree. People tend to alienate themselves apart from others over anything it seems, and yet act like they are concerned with the rest of the world but they really just show favoritism to those with views they agree with or things they share in common. I think that people just seem shallow and tend to be self-absorbed.

[elderwoodpixie.livejournal.com]

You have a very well thought out point, and nicely made. It's difficult for many to think globally, I commend you for it. In a better world, it might just work that way but in this one, I don't think it's usually as cut and dry. I agree with you on principle but I doubt that it's ever that simple.

[caersidi.livejournal.com]

Very well put.

I expect you'll find a number of people who will take issue with this. Not me though I give this a big thumbs up.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Yeah like I mentioned in a comment above and in my post yesterday, I'm bracing myself for some people to be all riled up about it. d=

[darkprism.livejournal.com]

Well written and well argued. Nicely done.

~*~

[shadowwolf13]

I can't say that I agree .... but it's very well written.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Well yes, unfortunately, its not that simple. There's problems such as the incredibly immense agricultural subsidies which make US ag hard to compete with, and there needs to be similar across-the-board employment regulation so that there isn't a "race to the bottom" as companies relocate to the least regulated place or countries lower regulations to attract business.

BUT so far it doesn't look like either is causing really critical problems. Even as un-simple as things currently are free trade serves everyone better than trade barriers.

[thenodrin.livejournal.com]

Very well written and well reasoned. I can definitely see where you are coming from. I don't agree with you, but I understand.

The thing is that it isn't as cut and dry as you suggest, and what you suggest isn't cut and dried. The American economy is intertwined with its culture and politics in such a way that if you cut it free, the others could die. Witness the political problems stemming from the current economic crisis.

Sending jobs overseas removes that money from America, and gives it to the other country. But, this doesn't help the other country, because their currency is in flux in comparison to ours. Here is an example: McDonald's can pay someone in America to run the drive thru for $1,48.00 per month ($6.55 per hour), or they can pay someone in Pakistan 2,500 rupees or $32.50 per month to run the drive thru. (There are some experimental McDonald's locations that have outsourced the drive thru order taker.)

Assuming that, politically and socially, the two minimum wages deliver the same quality of life, it is not helping anyone except McDonalds to outsource the job. The guy in Pakistan is not making the American minimum wage, he is making the Pakistani minimum wage.

In that respect, it is actually taking away from the person who needs that American minimum wage job. And, thinking globally, it is not helping the person in Pakistan. He would make the same wage doing any local job. Since Pakistan isn't outsourcing jobs to America, it makes no sense to give them our jobs, that we have unemployed people who are willing to do them, except in an effort to allow companies with the resources to outsource jobs to benefit from the political strength of the American dollar at a cost to America (because, I don't think that the US gets the taxes on those wages paid, I could be wrong on that.)

If that guy in Pakistan was receiving $6.55 per hour, American, and paying US taxes, and therefore benefiting from the outsourcing, I would agree with you. But, since the person benefiting from the outsourcing is a CEO and Board of Directors who are making millions of dollars per year, I'm not as for it. I would rather that money go to an American who could then support his family, keep his home, feed his children, etc.

Theno

[sosoclever.livejournal.com]

First and foremost, do you know of any South American (those from elsewhere please bear with me on the focus on trade in the Americas, but its the terms trade liberalization is usually talked about in here) regimes that are evil and oppressive offhand?

Venezuela and Bolivia. Maybe they are not evil (although I wouldn't entirely discount it), but they are certainly oppressive. But then, I don't think an awful lot of our jobs are going to Venezuela and Bolivia.

Nicely written, and well reasoned.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Hmmm well I must say you have presented the best counter-argument I've encountered yet and it causes me to have tremendous respect for you.

If we do assume that the person getting the job doesn't desperately need it and could just as well earn as much doing something else, whereas the person in America can't ... well that does make my argument sound much less compelling.

I can say though that at least in OTHER situations, such as the trade in the Americas I was concentrating on, most effected areas of the economy in Mexico have seen dramatic growth since NAFTA (and therefore presumably standard of living is improving)(most with the exception of Ag, due to US Ag subsidies), and I do believe in a lot of cases jobs are being created which are much better than other opportunities. So thats my face-saving I'm-not-wrong side-stepping-the-question-a-bit answer ;D

But to address your scenario I'd say I guess all things being equal if one or the other has the job I really don't care which one it is. If the guy in Pakistan has other options and the American doesn't have other comparable options ... well then the American has been living above his means and should readjust to a lower paying job or otherwise deal with it. Obviously I'm not going to get myself elected in Ohio with this argument but yeah basically I'm going with the all things would be better if the free market could freely sort itself out answer.

Again thanks for your very well written response!!

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Venezuela and Bolivia don't have the best governments, but I don't think they're psychotic enough to constitute an arguement that creating jobs there is unethical. I don't know if anywhere is really, since like I said there's strong ties between development and democracy / a healthy civil society. I guess the only time you'd want to not help develop a country would be if the government is truly just pocketing all the money or keeping its people in serf-like oppression.

[theafaye.livejournal.com]

Well I will not be pouting and flouncing today... The whole issue of what goes on in other countries outside of your own is quite a thorny one and very complex so it could be argued that you've over simplified - but that's why I don't expect a short LJ entry to cover all the ground that I would want to see in a thesis. I don't really see the problem with your attitude to be honest.

It is making me think that maybe I should have written the anti-PC entry I was considering after all, though.

[furzicle.livejournal.com]

Actually, I think a far more egregious example of disregard for foreign lives comes every time you hear about a horrific airline disaster in another country. It usually goes something like this:
A jumbo jet crashed this morning into the steppes of Russia, killing 645 passengers and crew. Fortunately, only 4 Americans were on board.

It is usually followed by a 16 paragraph story about the adoption of kittens.

jobs?!

[nibot.livejournal.com]

Jobs? You mean, that arrangement when you go into an enclosed structure lit by fluorescent lamps eight hours a day to do something unpleasant?

Yeah, let's send them abroad!

Nobody really wants a job! Oh, okay, I guess they want "a place in the economy that enables them to exchange their labor for goods and services they desire."

But a better arrangement is when we send those jobs to other countries and have foreigns work for us!

Sometimes we don't even have to give them anything in return!

CHINA!

Re: jobs?!

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

They're communist they work merely for the joy of working ;)

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Yeah I mean, if I tried to hit everything it would have been a very long rambling entry so I tried to streamline it for those who don't want a thorough discourse on international economics. But I think my basic thesis would still hold true even if you included all the finer details: that people generally don't care about the welfare of people in other countries in comparison to the welfare of people they don't know in their own countries .. but they should

[theafaye.livejournal.com]

Which is a perfectly reasonable contention.

One of the things I've found most fascinating in this week is what's got people all worked up and what's met with a perfectly balanced response. It hasn't always been what I would have expected.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

I've found a lot of entries this week, though I feel I should care about them, I just don't ;D

But seriously. a lot of people took the opportunity to talk about what they find is boring and quite frankly, its kind of boring.

(which isn't to say there aren't some awesome entries as well)

[theafaye.livejournal.com]

I haven't read all the entries - far from it. So I guess that so far I've been lucky in that the majority of what I've read has been either thought provoking, well written or interesting or a combination of all of those. I do think that whatever you're writing about does need to draw in the voters - as you say if you're writing about what you think is boring, you better make darned sure you can do it in an interesting way.

[kittenboo.livejournal.com]

interesting ideas, not that I agree, but I'm all for sharing your own views about things and not holding back

[boxsofrain.livejournal.com]

Very well written, as usual from you. :)

[solstice-singer.livejournal.com]

Very well done! Americans can be rather egocentric at times! I'm glad you wrote this.

[lilmissmagic71.livejournal.com]

Great post!

[imafarmgirl.livejournal.com]

You bring up some good points. I liked this entry.

[med-kitty.livejournal.com]

Very very nice!

[baxaphobia.livejournal.com]

Well written and thought out.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks (=

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks (=

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks (=

[jenandbronze.livejournal.com]

Excellent thoughts, another minority who are trying to find jobs, is like myself, who has severe disabilities, who are capable to be employable. I have some issues with taxi companies that use those from other countries, especially muslims, and since I use a guide dog, I and many others, have been denied access to riding in their vehicle, when it is against the law to do that. It is a touchy subject, but I think you did a good job in this case!

You have my vote.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Muslims ... can't have dogs in their cars?!

[jenandbronze.livejournal.com]

Yah, muslims, in their religion, are required not to have contact via the dog's salivary glands, etc... as they believe they are unsanitary etc. They don't want hair in the vehicle, etc etc... since they have this ritual that they have to strip and clean themselves from contact of a dog. I know a few Muslims that have guide dogs, and are trying ti de-mystify this myth... it is the blood and drool they have to stay away; not the fur. It is crazy.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Wow crazy I had no idea.

[tigrkittn.livejournal.com]

Interesting perspective and nicely written!

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks! (=

[rhodielady-47.livejournal.com]

You have a very readable style of writing, but I cannot agree with what you've written.
I prefer that Americans be well-employed. It may be selfish and discriminatory to prefer it but can you honestly say that the foreigners who are receiving our lost jobs truly care about us as much as you think we should care about them?

The small town where I live has lost almost all its factories due to the NAFTA trade agreement and the few that are hanging on are downsizing. We now have to pay a county income tax to help make up the lost tax revenue from the missing factories and our property taxes also went up last year. Lots of local people are losing their homes and their transportation thanks to the bad economy. The NAFTA trade agreement was supposed to help America but the lower classes here sure haven't gotten any help from it.

Why is it more advantageous to make something on the other side of the globe AND then pay the high price for shipping it here as a ready-made product than it is to make it HERE? Oil is an expensive fuel no matter where you buy it and what's left of it shouldn't be wasted.
America needs its industry. Industry pays good wages and more importantly it pays good taxes. When Industry disappears locally it leaves a terrible waste of real estate and talented people behind. People have to be cared for one way or another. I'd sooner pay them good wages for their products and services than welfare and their standard of living from paid wages would certainly be a lot higher than it would be from welfare.
As for "Free Trade", there really is no such thing. Many countries bit the bullet and subsidized their own industries for decades in an effort to drive American industry out of business. American lumber, steel, and textiles have mostly went the way of the dodo. And guess what? The prices of these commodies is going up--steeply. If I wanted to make a quilt out of cotton cloth, I'd now have to pay for that cotton cloth what I used to pay for SILK.
-------------------------------------------
Now to talk about something you haven't thought of:
Where do you think all the venture capital is going to come from that's needed to develop the new American industries that are supposed to take the place of the industries that went to other countries? Traditionally, it was the rich industry owners looking to reinvest their profits who provided the startup capital necessary for new factories, new industries and new businesses. Well, may I remind you that the money walked out of America along with industry and went elsewhere? It doesn't make sense for overseas factory owners to invest their money here when they could invest it in their home country where they can keep an eye on it. They certainly won't after this sub-prime mortgage scandal. It's simply too risky now.
It's my personal opinion that one reason why we haven't made more headway with developing alternative energy resources is simply because the capital those would-be industries need for R&D just isn't there for them. The big oil companies which makeup the last big industry America has certainly aren't going to invest in what might be their future competition. We aren't just lacking the capital to get alternative energy R&D going either. We also lack the capital to get new industries up and running too. The new industries that were supposed to EMPLOY all those out-of-work people left jobless when the old industries went overseas. R&D budgets are being cut at all the research universities these days and that will cripple us for decades since it limits what we can learn and develop and it's out of this knowledge base that new industry comes from.
I'm all ears for any ideas on how to break this downward spiral America seems to be in.
:(
[Please understand this is not a personal attack on you. It's simply that this issue is far more complex, devious, and far-reaching than your writing suggests. Truthfully, it's probably more complex, devious, and far-reaching than my writing suggests too.]