|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: David Mandelzys on Tuesday, April 05 2005 @ 11:56 PM CDT |
"I don't understand this section. I see how multinats switching can erode higher wages in First World countries. But how does multinats switching prevent developing countries to move up the ladder?"
Because as soon as they try the multinat can move again (or threaten to)....again how fast the multinational can move depends on the mobility of the industry and the available labour force.
"After all, if the factory moves to India, it has to offer better wages than the people of India are being paid in order to get them to work. Admittedly, if the populace is destitute, this can be very low, but it is still a step up from their current situation. I don't see how this, from India's point of view, is a bad thing?"
Because the arrangements allowing the multinats to sell goods to Western markets from India are the same arrangements keeping India destitute.(simplified argument). Neo-Liberal economics works to stop development because it allows goods to be produced in a country without significantly contributing to the country's infrastructure or tax base.
"What do you expect to happen if the multinats don't switch?"
If multinats can't switch, then labour can organize and fight for higher wages, benefits, etc.
Countries can levy taxes and develop infrastructure/social programs.....basically, I would expect development.
This discussion thread is pretty abstracted and generalized (sounds like Economics), I would like to find some examples to show this in action and I will try to post some if I have time....[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
