Insight into Wal-Mart’s Collective Bargaining Contracts in China

There are Billions of people in China. Can’t Wal*Mart just move there a leave us 335Million Americans alone? We’ll do just fine with out them and their “Authoritarian Management Style” will fit right in. The funny thing is even the Chinese won’t put up with it and thet are Communist!

Bobby: There is a six part series on Asia Times entitled “The Coming Trade Wars” by Henry C.K. Liu . It is exceptional!Here’s an excerpt regarding “free trade."~~~~~~~Paul Samuelson, a Nobel laureate economist, famed author of the standard economics textbook and an ardent supporter of free trade, in an article in the Journal of Economic Perspectives (2004) suggested that China’s growing economic might calls into question whether free trade is a win-win game for the US. Samuelson said open trade has helped the US economy grow since World War II, but that competition from abroad drove down wages in lower-skill jobs. Over time, China and India could displace US high-tech jobs as well and more US wages could be forced further down to sustain competitiveness. Even though US consumers get cheaper Chinese-made goods, many US citizens could be net losers from such trade, Samuelson wrote. Consumer gains from lower prices are offset by worker income losses. If globalization causes enough US citizens to suffer lower wages, the US as a whole loses. “It is going to become so big a problem that some slowing down is going to be politically popular - and has some merits,” said Samuelson, who estimated that from World War II to the early 1980s, increased trade with a revived Europe and the Pacific Basin accounted for 30% of the rise in the standard of living in the US, as a result of the law of comparative advantage.

But Samuelson expects the US to gain less from trade, outsourcing, investment, and other aspects of globalization in the coming 30 years, possibly even lose out on a net basis. In such a case, a minority of the US population would gain, but more would suffer lower living standards. “The general dogma that anything that expands globalization is good for everyone isn’t right,” Samuelson said. And as all political scientists know, when the majority loses, the politics turns ugly in a democracy. Even for free-trade guru Samuelson, free trade in a global market economy is only desirable if its serves US national interest. When it does not, free trade needs to be replaced by managed trade, directed by a domestic command economy. (Continued)

One difference between free trade then, when it was good for the US, and now is that greater inequality has become institutionalized in the US, Samuelson argues. Neither the political establishment nor the electorate is any longer willing to spread around the benefits of freer trade to help those in the US hurt by globalization, as they did in the aftermath of the Great Depression after World War II, through a progressive tax structure, government social spending, and transfer payments. Those harmed are usually at the lower end of the income and wealth ladder. This is true of individuals within the US as well as those in other trading nations. Free trade has worsened the fair distribution of income for the working class and emasculated the ability of trade unions to command pricing power for labor, while the more educated professional classes, particularly those in management and finance, have gotten most of the financial gain. Warren Buffet, one of the most successful investing capitalists in the world, has also been saying that the current US tax regime favors the rich unfairly.” ~~~~Asia Times online,July 2005,Henry CK Liu

HI ddrb,
Another concise post!
“from World War II to the early 1980s, increased trade with a revived Europe and the Pacific Basin accounted for 30% of the rise in the standard of living in the US, as a result of the law of comparative advantage.” But pray tell what took place in the 1980s?

Trade was kept from emerging as an important issue in the 2004 presidential campaign. The administration of President George W Bush had taken protective measures during its first term in areas where key political constituencies faced competitive pressures, such as steel, agriculture, and lumber, but the president remained solidly a free-trader. The American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) has been pushing for trade with the poor nations to be “fair” by forcing them to adopt international labor and environmental standards. “Fair trade” has become the slogan for both labor and conservatives, but the practical effect of fair trade as defined by US labor would be no trade, as the poor countries are not allowed any pricing power, particularly in wages and environmental protection, by the unfair and unequal terms of trade set by their more powerful trading partners in the ongoing trade regime.

The labor movement in the US has been the main victim of neo-liberal global trade. Union membership has fallen from 31.8% of the workforce in 1948 to 12.5% in 2004. Unions have been increasingly ineffective in protecting worker interests as US domestic politics turns conservative in favor of management. . Traditionally, union pay and benefits helped lift even non-union worker pay as employers had to match or better union pay scales to keep employees from joining unions. While union membership of government workers increased from 25% in 1975 to 36% in 2004, the total number of government workers has been declining as a direct result of anti-big-government trends since the era of president Ronald Reagan.

The opposing presidential candidates of both political parties proclaimed support for trade liberalization, while they make protectionist concessions separately to their traditional constituents for purely tactical reasons of election politics rather than as strategic reforms in national trade policy, with Bush favoring big business such as steel and Kerry opposing outsourcing. Samuelson of course warns that just because free trade sometimes hurts does not mean that trade barriers in the form of tariffs can help. Most efforts at protectionism are self-defeating, Samuelson says. Nonetheless, a slowdown in globalization might be “more comfortable”, allows the guru of free trade.~~~~Asia Times online,July 2005,Henry CK Liu

Bobby: The eighties brought in The era of Reagan dismantling labor as we knew it,and the decided Neocon effort to “shrink” government. Also, the creation of Nafta, ChinaGate and Global Crossing scandals - deregulation of banking, the list goes on..the stage being set for the Enrons and future subprime debacles,to name a couple. I know you can amplify on some others.

“There are Billions of people in China. Can’t Wal*Mart just move there a leave us 335Million Americans alone?”

Try this on for size, Bobby.  Suppose that our deficit with China gets so bad that there’s almost no chance we’d be able to pay them back.

China looks around sizing up it’s options.  Realizing that dumping all the dollars it now holds, would be devastating to the world economy, it simply decides to make a play for Wal-mart and take it over entirely.

Then people like RDS can brag about all the money they’re saving at “The Great Wall-Mart.”

...it simply decides to make a play for Wal-mart and take it over entirely.

From what I have read, all land under a business belongs to the state (Chinese government).

Another spot for possible nationalization would be Mexico.

“I supported this company. I’d bleed Wal-Mart blue for them, but come Thursday night, whenever I was terminated, I’ve lost all respect for Wal-Mart.” ~ Mark Neeley (12 yrs)

Try this on for size folks. Robert Kiyosaki, author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad has a chapter in another book of his. Ths book is titled Rich Dad’s Prophecy. He has a chapter titled “The Perfect Storm.” He mentins 8 changes in this chaper.

1) Millions will be left destitute in old age.
2) Medidal care will get even more expensive
3) Terrorism will increase.
4) Japan, currently the world’s second largest economy, is on the brink of financial collapse and depression.
5) China will become the world’s largest economy.
6) The world population will continue to age.
7) Wall Street is obsolete.
8) Big corporations are losing the public trust and failing.

About China this is what he writes. “While Japan is on the brink of falling from the number two spot in the world economy, China is set to become number one. America is contracting financially, while at the same time China is booming. It is estimated that sometime around the year 2020, China is expected to pass the U.S. as the economic powerhouse of the world. As reported in the May 6, 2002 Business Week, China has 21 percent of the world’s population. It has an almost unlimited supply of human capital, and now it opens its borders through joining the World Trade Organization, its economic impact is just beginning to be seen.”
This book was copywrited in 2002. Juat some food for thought for some of you.

ddrb,

I found some parts of the article you posted, interesting:

“"Fair trade” has become the slogan for both labor and conservatives”

“The labor movement in the US has been the main victim of neo-liberal global trade.”

“Union membership has fallen from 31.8% of the workforce in 1948 to 12.5% in 2004.”

“Unions have been increasingly ineffective in protecting worker interests”

“The opposing presidential candidates of both political parties proclaimed support for trade liberalization, while they make protectionist concessions separately to their traditional constituents for purely tactical reasons of election politics rather than as strategic reforms in national trade policy”

Did anybody else make the connection that Wal*Mart is suddenly suporting the Republicans, now that their ex employee Hillary isn’t on the Ticket? They sure suported them in the 90’s!

RDS: The ENTIRE six part series is exceptional. PLEASE note,this was written in 2005-referring to the positions of PAST candidates, particuloarly Kerry and Bush. Kerry lost,so Bush is the one to consider for much of our present economic free(market)fall. I would also note once again, I do not post articles unless I have completely read them ,BEFORE posting,and intend to be prepared to defend the content thereof.Don’t congratulate yourself on an alleged “gotcha” moment. You wouldn’t even have this info had I not CHOSEN to post and share it.

P.S.: I guess you didn’t find THIS interesting,BUT I did!___"Traditionally, union pay and benefits helped lift EVEN non-union worker pay as employers had to match or better union pay scales to keep employees from joining unions. “~~~Capital has been organized for years, theough Chambers of Commerce and trade groups- why shouldn’t labor?Its WAY past time for the dignity of human work to be restored,respected and rewarded in the workplace.

Here is a list of the topics in the six part series. The author ,Mr Liu, a Harvard graduate, writes with the keen observer’s eye of one who is not so far in the forest, that they can’t see the trees. Much of the vision is 20/20, and is invaluable for a world, and the U.S., viewed through another lens. I may not agree with some of his positions,but the extensive knowledge and research is unfailingly informative, thought provoking,and well worth reading for those who want to educate themselves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 6
Trade wars can lead to shooting wars
The rapid rise of China as a major economic force has provoked US policymakers to wonder whether free trade is still in the US national interest; after all, “free” trade always favors the strong. Now that the US has gotten its way and China has unpegged the yuan, its ill-considered policies will come home to roost, making for desperate times - for everyone. This is the final article in this series. (Aug 19, ‘05)

PART 5
Intellectual property rights: Bad TRIPS
Society benefits in the long term when intellectual propert protection encourages creation and invention. However, under the provisions of a WTO rule produced by the Uruguay Round in 1986, the wealthy countries and giant corporations have manipulated this principle for their own short-term gain. But the developing economies are fighting back. (Aug 4, ‘05)

PART 4
Scarcity economics and overcapacity
The myth of scarcity is as old as the story of Adam and Eve, who were driven out of the garden of plentitude by a jealous god bent on preserving his pre-eminence - rather like today’s wealthy capitalists. But the myth is unsustainable, as even the concept of employment is becoming obsolete. (Jul 27, ‘05)

PART 3
Trade in the age of overcapacity
Neo-liberals have created a false dichotomy between so-called command economies and market economies. With the CNOOC-Unocal controversy, ideologue fantasy is once again clashing with harsh reality as the US on the one hand relies on China to relieve its overcapacity problem while on the other it fears for its national security. (Jul 7, ‘05)

PART 2
Dollar hegemony against sovereign credit
Twentieth-century history showed that economic fundamentalism can have devastating results. Early in that century, rigid adherence to the gold standard was exacerbated by sterling hegemony, ultimately leading to the Great Depression and World War II. Now a new bunch of fundamentalists are in charge. (Jun 23, ‘05)

PART 1
The coming trade war and global depression
Trade protectionism is re-emerging, but the irony is that it is being driven not by the poor economies that have been hurt the most by the globalized neo-liberal trade regime, but by the wealthy economies, especially the US. (Jun 15, ‘05) ~~~Asia Times Online-(Also available online in Chinese. )

“I do not post articles unless I have completely read them ,BEFORE posting,and intend to be prepared to defend the content thereof.Don’t congratulate yourself on an alleged “gotcha” moment. You wouldn’t even have this info had I not CHOSEN to post and share it. “

Well congratulate yourself on your “high-horse” back ddrb!  btw, you certainly didn’t defend that Denver Post article very well.

I do not post articles unless I have completely read them ,BEFORE posting,and intend to be prepared to defend the content thereof.

RDS only said he found some parts “interesting” (leave it to you to read into everything, everyone says!).

btw, you certainly didn’t defend that Denver Post article very well.

She certainly didn’t, did she?

bbrd: There wasn’t ANYTHING to defend-the FACTS spoke for themselves. When comparing WalMart to WalMart only,the prices of groceries were HIGHER at the WalMarts located in low income areas. WHY do you pretend to not understand that FACT, which happened to be the TITLE of the thread,BTW?And just for the record, this same debate about this same story was held on at least TWO other occasions. I suggest anyone whose in doubt simply either read the article,or stop shopping at WalMart ,and remove ANY doubt of pricing hijinks . ("Jacking up the price because many people use food stamps in these neighborhoods?)

BTW: As a bagger told me at Kroger’s not long ago,"I used to work and shop at WalMart.But I quit . The last straw was when they cut out layaways..They lie when they say they’ve got the cheapest prices-they figure if they say it often enough,people will believe it.  I know better-I shop at Big Lots.’ BTW,that” Lowest Prices Always"logo WalMart used at one time was challenged in court for violation of truth in advertsing.WalMart lost,then the logo stated “Low Prices-ALWAYS."She was right.

“When comparing WalMart to WalMart only,the prices of groceries were HIGHER at the WalMarts located in low income areas.”

NOT ALWAYS TRUE.  And what chart were you looking at?  At their highest price the Smith Rd store (food stamp area) was CHEAPER than their Centennial store for their highest price.  How about the fact that Walmart had FAR LOWER prices than ALL of their competitors when comparing apples to apples for high and low pricing?  How about the fact that K-Mart charges almost $5 more for the same goods at their Englewood store when compared to the highest prices Walmart offers.  How about the fact that WMW’s title “WAL-MART CHARGES MORE FOR GROCERIES IN LOW-INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS” is far from the truth and completely misleading from the original Denver Post title “Price disparity in groceries”?

I certainly hope no one goes to you for an objective opinion on stories ddrb because I highly doubt they will get one from you.  You COMPLETELY missed the boat on the Denver Post story as did WMW with their sensationalistic title to a blog story.  Both of you may as well write for the National Enquirer.

You are right on one thing, if anyone has any doubts please read the article for yourself.  And if you want to help yourselves to lower prices please feel free to shop at Walmart because they certainly beat the competition.  That what this article says.

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_8818445

Mary: Please don’t lecture about objectivity.

That’s a laugh!  Actually ddrb a more appropriate phrase would be “ddrb’s LACK of objectivity”.  Your path of destruction is well documented in the archives.  At least I don’t have a complete full press for or against Walmart.  That too is well documented in the archives.

“The Shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep’s throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as a destroyer of liberty.” Abraham Lincoln

I’d still like to see the two of you mud wrestle.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” ~ Margaret Mead

“I’d still like to see the two of you mud wrestle”.. “Mud"(?), that wouldn’t give me “home court advantage,Ken.

I’d still like to see the two of you mud wrestle.

Mary, leave it to Ken to try and throw his monkey wrench in the works…

BTW: As a bagger told me at Kroger’s not long ago,"I used to work and shop at WalMart.But I quit . The last straw was when they cut out layaways..

...which doesn’t make any sense at all, given that in any retail store, any layaway operation can really screw-up a stockroom/logistics function for the average worker.

Why don’t you see layaways at Target?

I know better-I shop at Big Lots.

Yeah, I guess shopping for other retailers/manufacturers’ unwanted merchandise is much better than shopping at Wal-Mart…

Back to the Denver Post article, it should be noted that King Soopers is one of Kroger’s stores—anyone out there think “google gal” may have some sort of stake in that chain?

Mattel wins $100 million Bratz suit…
Well now maybe they can afford to move some prodution back to the US. What a bunch of hypocrits. They were among the first American manufacturers to move to China and help write the “guide book” to all the other American companies that followed suite. How is this relevant? Who more than the Chinese have a worse record of patent infringement, intelectual property rip offs, and just plain piracy. America built Mattel. Mattel Screwed America. Now they suck.

PS:
I’m no fan of “Bratz”.

Mary, leave it to Ken to...

You don’t have to tell Mary what I’m doing. She knows perfectly well. Don’t you, Mary?

I don’t know if you noticed, Mary, but way back when Hillary was vying for the nomination, there was a guy that would show up at her rallies with a sign that read:

Iron my shirt!

Did you happen to see that?

mary in
What are you like a secret Chinese agent?

Yeah, I guess shopping for other retailers/manufacturers’ unwanted merchandise is much better than shopping at Wal-Mart… bbrd~~~~~~~~~ANYTHING is better than shopping at WalMart. I’m particularly fond of Tuesday Morning and Overstock.com. There,bb, a threw you a bone for your “research”.