>X-Authentication-Warning: scribe.uwaterloo.ca: majordomo set sender to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 16:30:55 -0400
>To: "Basic Income" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: Ed Goertzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: The Problems Caused By Globalization
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Precedence: bulk
>
>Hi all:
>Below my comments is an except from an item by Columnist Dalton Camp,
>Toronto Star.
>
>It essentially substantiates a quote from Tom Courchne's book the "Canada
>Health and Social Transfer".(1995) CHST Act.
>
>The key words, "Fordist paradigm" refers to Henry Ford increasing the wages
>of his mass production employes so that they could buy his Model T
>vehicles. His action caused his ostrecization from the capitalist
>manufacturing community and consequent reaching out to both Russia and
>Germany pre WWII.
>
>Expanded, the paradigm means that wage costs to employers should be
>sufficient to allow labour to purchase food shelter and clothing for
>themselves AND THE INDIGENT DEPENDANTS IN THE COMMUNITY.
>
>Bearing in mind that the this paradigm was set in place before WWII and the
>setting up of major social service programs in the 1960's, during the
>"minority government" of Lester Pearson.
>
>This is the legislation that effectively cut billions of dollars of
>transfer payments from the Federal Government to the Provinces. Previous to
>the Act, the transfers were "conditional", they had to be spent (by the
>provinces) on specific programs (Health, Education) so that the social
>services would approximate eace other in all the provinces, regardless of
>local residents ability to contribute the provincial taxes.
>
>Globalization has resulted in Manufacturers no longer considering
>themselves an integral part of the larger community, the civil commons but
>a separate entity, accountable to no soverign power, democratic or otherwise.
>
>========================
>This is the excerpt.:
>=====================
>This "techno-economic" revolution is beginning to alter the very concept of
>"work" in a modem economy, and that fact has huge and troubling
>implications for social organization. The Fordist paradigm, in which
>workers were paid enough to be able to buy the sorts of products they had a
>hand in making, and could give up a share of their income to finance an
>extensive welfare system for the unemployed, the retired, and the ill, is
>no longer tenable. Globalization has meant that factory workers in the US
>cannot compete with their counterparts in Korea and still maintain a high
>and growing standard of living. It has meant that governments cannot
>afford to administer huge social programmes on the proceeds of a declining
>manufacturing sector. Finally it has meant new kinds of jobs in the West -
>in finance, real estate, computer software - for which an industrial
>workforce is untrained.
>Excepted From Dalton Camp�s April 19th 2000, column, "Does anyone really
>know what the experts are doing?
>
>Ed Goertzen,
>Oshawa
>
