Delocalizarea privita din perspectiva raportului capital-munca Globalist Analysis > Global Economy
What Really Ails Europe (and America): The Doubling of the Global Workforce By Richard Freeman | Friday, June 03, 2005 Most people still have not come to grips with the most fundamental reality change in the current era of globalization � the fact that the global labor force has virtually doubled in size in the last 15 years. Harvard University's Richard Freeman explores the far- reaching consequences of the addition of countries like China, India and the ex-Soviet Union to the global pool of labor. The global economic community, and economic policymakers in governments and global institutions alike, has yet to fully understand the most fundamental economic development in this era of globalization � the doubling of the global labor force. The doubling I am referring to is the increased number of persons in the global economy that results from China, India and the ex-Soviet Union embracing market capitalism. In 1980, the global workforce consisted of workers in the advanced countries, parts of Africa and most of Latin America. Approximately 960 million persons worked in these economies. Population growth � largely in poorer countries � increased the number employed in these economies to about 1.46 billion workers by 2000. New players enter the scene But in the 1980s and 1990s, workers from China, India and the former Soviet bloc entered the global labor pool. Of course, these workers had existed before then. The difference, though, was that their economies suddenly joined the global system of production and consumption. In 2000, those countries contributed 1.47 billion workers to the global labor pool � effectively doubling the size of the world's now connected workforce. Competing globally These new entrants to the global economy brought little capital with them. Either because they were poor or because the capital they had was of little economic value. Using figures from the Penn World Tables, I estimate that the entry of China, India and the former Soviet bloc into the global economy cut the global capital/labor ratio by just 55% to 60% what it otherwise would have been. The capital/labor ratio is a critical determinant of the wages paid to workers and of the rewards to capital. The more capital each worker has, the higher will be their productivity and pay. A decline in the global capital/labor ratio shifts the balance of power in markets toward capital, as more workers compete for working with that capital. Even considering the high savings rate in the new entrants � the World Bank estimates that China has a savings rate of 40% of GDP � it will take 30 or so years for the world to re-attain the capital/labor ratio among the countries that had previously made up the global economy. Pressure to compete Having twice as many workers and nearly the same amount of capital places great pressure on labor markets throughout the world. This pressure will affect workers in the developing countries who had traditionally participated in the global economy, as well as workers in advanced countries. Countries that had hoped to grow through exports of low-wage goods must look for new sectors in which to advance � if they are to make it in the global economy. The effect on advanced countries Mexico, Columbia or South Africa cannot compete with China in manufacturing, as long as Chinese wages are one-quarter or so of theirs � especially since Chinese labor is roughly as productive as theirs. The ending of the apparel quotas in January 2005 has brought this point home to many countries, which are now rethinking their growth strategy. But the advent of 1.47 billion new workers also pressures labor in advanced countries. The traditional trade story has been that most workers in advanced countries benefit from trade with developing countries because advanced country workers are skilled, while developing country workers are unskilled. But this analysis has become increasingly obsolete due to the massive investments that the large populous developing countries are making in human capital. China and India are producing millions of college graduates capable of doing the same work as the college graduates of the United States, Japan or Europe � at much lower pay. A shifting monopoly By 2010, China will graduate more PhDs in science and engineering than the United States. The huge number of highly educated workers in India and China threatens to undo the traditional pattern of trade between advanced and less developed countries. Historically, advanced countries have innovated high-tech products that require high-wage educated workers and extensive R&D, while developing countries specialize in old manufacturing products. The reason for this was that the advanced countries had a near monopoly on scientists and engineers and other highly educated workers. Job migration As China, India and other developing countries have increased their number of university graduates, this monopoly on high-tech innovative capacity has diminished. Today, most major multinationals have R&D centers in China or India, so that the locus of technological advance may shift. Certainly, the rate of technological catch-up will grow, reducing the lead of advanced countries over the lower wage developing countries. Business experts report that if the work is digital � which covers perhaps 10% of employment in the United States � it can and eventually will be off-shored to low-wage highly educated workers in developing countries. If and when Russia gets its economic act together, labor market pressures on educated and skilled workers will grow. Transitioning to global market capitalism The entry of China, India and the former Soviet bloc to the global capitalist economy is a turning point in economic history. For the first time, the vast majority of humans will operate under market capitalism, with access to the most modern technology. The workers in these new entrants to the global capitalist system should make great gains, reducing rates of poverty, as indeed has occurred in China and India over the past 10-15 years. A difficult change But there will be a long and difficult transition for workers throughout the world to this change � a more formidable transition than that associated with the recovery of Europe and Japan after World War II. In advanced countries, real wages and/or employment are likely to grow more slowly than in years past. In developing countries that have traditionally been part of the global economy, manufacturing jobs are at risk. They are likely to see a shift in labor to the informal sector with rising poverty, as indeed has occurred in many countries. China and India themselves are likely to face problems. Inequality in China and the former Soviet bloc has risen at rates unprecedented in economic history. Inequality has historically been high in India. Large numbers of rural workers in China and India could lose from globalization, creating dangers of social unrest, particularly in non-democratic China. Responsibility of policymakers What does all this mean for economic policymakers and officials like Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank and his counterparts at the International Monetary Fund? So far, the World Bank and the IMF have tended to blame economic problems on insufficient labor flexibility, or fiscally irresponsible governments with excessive expenditures on social safety nets, as well as on government interventions in markets. The role of the IMF and World Bank The IMF, in particular, has sought to protect capital, particularly foreign capital, as its actions in Argentina make clear. But with a doubled workforce, capital should be quite capable of taking care of itself. Instead of seeking to protect capital, the World Bank and the IMF need to help countries develop policies to minimize the costs of adjustment to workers during what is likely to be a long transition. The global community needs to make sure that the gains of globalization are spread widely, to avoid backlashes and instability. And the world needs to increase savings as rapidly as possible to build up the global capital stock. For its part, the United States has to shift from being the world's greatest debtor to becoming a giant creditor to the global economy. A new consensus In short, the world needs to abandon the Washington Consensus model of globalization that was designed, not all that successfully, for an utterly different global economy. The world needs a new model of globalization and new policies that put upfront the well-being of workers around the world. They will be on the short end of the stick for a long time to come. http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=4542 --- In [email protected], Mihai Zodian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pai domnul Ricardo pornea de la ideea ca fiecare tara are un avantaj natural intr-un anumit sector si de aici celebrul exemplu cu bumbacul britanic si vinul portughez. Numai ca aceasta conceptie e statica, ignora complet rolul schimbarilor tehnologice, faptul ca desi toti castiga pe termen lung din urma liberului schimb, unii castiga mai mult si altii mai putin (decisiv in politica internationala), considerente ecologice (care indica ca lumea nu are cum sa devina egala din punct de vedere al dezvoltarii, resursele fiind limitate). > > In unele industii de baza gen otel, exista un exces al capacitatilor de productie si o crestere masiva a productivitatii (mai putini oameni, mai multe produse). Adeseori, nu avem de-a face cu dezindustrializarea Vestului, ci cu supraeficienta, (oferta mai mare decat cererea). Pastrarea locurilor de munca intr-o serie de industrii costa intre 150.000 si 500.000 de dolari pe an in US, vezi Gilpin, The Challenge of Global Capitalism, 2000. In acelasi timp, unele sectoare au valoare strategica si nu se poate renunta usor la ele. Iar o economie nu se poate baza numai pe servicii. > > Apropos de China, eu sunt curios cat va dura combinatia aceasta intre partidul comunist si economie capitalista in expansiune. > > > Alan Rosca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit : > Impartasesc acelesi idei cu ale lui Mihai si sunt, > ferm, un adept al globalizarii si comertului liber. > am inceput insa, de catva timp, sa il chestionez pe > Riccardo, si sa caut nuante la principiile general > acceptate ale scolii de la Chicago. cateva intrebari > privitoare la impactul globalizarii asupra tarilor > bogate si mai putin bogate, la care nu le gasesc > raspuns (satisfacator): > > 1.- un muncitor roman este mai putin productiv decat > unul american. dar nu este de 100 de ori mai putin > productiv. cu toate acestea castiga de 100 de ori mai > putin. bineinteles, aceasta este o reducere simplista, > dar chiar adaugand impactul mijloacelor de productie > si in general al mediului economic, ambele superioare > in U.S., cred ca o parte din diferenta este totusi > artificiala si tine de existenta barierelor > comerciale. intrebarea este cum se va produce > "nivelarea" veniturilor in conditiile in care se > desfiinteaza barierele? bineinteles, cei 8 milioane de > muncitori romani sunt neinsemnati in comparatie cu > cele 760 de milioane de muncitori chinezi, si inca > atatia indieni. > > 2.- cum va functiona globalizarea in conditiile in > care avem, intre mega-jucatorii economici, atat > societati deschise (U.S.), cat si societati inchise > (China): vor respecta ambele aceleasi reguli ale > jocului? exemplul politicii comerciale a Japoniei in > anii 1980 nu este din cele mai optimiste (intr-adevar, > pe de alta parte in ultimii 15 ani Japonia a cazut > tocmai datorita respectivelor politici); > > 3.- intelepciunea neo-liberala spune ca economiile > dezvoltate vor transfera industriile de baza in tari > in curs de dezvoltare, cu mijloace de productie > ieftine, si vor continua sa isi pastreze avansul > datorita inovatiei. dar in prezent China produce > textile mai ieftin decat Bangladesh, unde forta de > munca este mai ieftina - datorita tocmai inovatiei: > faptului ca foloseste cele mai moderne echipamente, > mai moderne decat chiar firmele americane. ce se > intampla cand China incepe sa produca routere (a > inceput deja) si microcipuri (e in proces), nu numai > otel? China produce 400,000 de noi ingineri pe an, iar > in America numarul lor a scazut la circa 60,000 > anual...asta o sa se vada in mod cert si in nivelul > inovatiei in urmatoarele decade. > > 4.-intr-adevar, America este deja in proces de a isi > transfera avantajul din IT catre noile industrii de > avangarda: bioingineria si stiintele medicale > avansate. dar vor fi acestea suficiente pentru a > contrabalansa transferul industriilor mai putin > avansate in tari in curs de dezvoltare? serviciile nu > sunt neaparat o solutie, daca se pierde un job de > $120,000 pe an in IT catre India, si se pastreaza un > job de $12,000 pe an la MacDonald's sau unul de > $25,000 pe an in constructii. > > 5.- tot intelepciunea traditionala neo-liberala spune > ca unele din aceste probleme se vor rezolva prin > recalificare. dar problema este ca tocmai oamenii cei > mai prosti sunt cei care se recalifica cel mai > greu...ca deh stau prost la capitolul educatie. si > deci, ce se intampla cu aceasta masa de oameni? > asteptam sa moara? dar ei voteaza intre timp... > > Revenind la Riccardo si avantajul comparativ: incep sa > fiu preocupat ca multe din graficele acelea frumoase > pe care le studiem in grad school ignora factorul > timp. sunt foarte convins ca respectivele curbe sunt > corecte...dar ma intreb cat timp dureaza ajustarile > respective...cum spunea un alt mare economist "in the > long run, we are all dead". > > Acestea fiind spuse, subscriu la mesajul > co-listeanului meu, privind impactul limitat al > delocalizarii. in ceea ce priveste globalizarea: se > intampla oricum...si am face bine sa fim pregatiti > pentru ea. francezii au ales sa isi bage capul in > nisip. > > cu stima, > > A.R. > > --- Mihai Zodian wrote: > > > Eu as mentiona doar ca firmele internationale nu se > > "delocalizeaza" atat de mult pe cat se crede. O > > privire fugara asupra investitiilor straine directe > > arata ca de obicei, companiile puternice investesc > > in tarile bogate, nu in lumea a treia. Avantajul > > mainii de lucru ieftine nu este atat de important pe > > cat se crede. Nu mai traim in secolul XIX, in epoca > > industialismului. Circa 70% din PIB-ul tarilor > > dezvoltate este produs de servicii, dintre cere cele > > mai profitabile (banci, fonduri de investitii, > > asigurari, informatica) sunt deja globalizate, iar > > altele sunt greu de mutat (constructii). Se cauta > > forta de munca instruita si piete mari si bogate. > > Adeseori, o companie ce alege delocalizarea risca > > sa-si piarda accesul la consumatorii principali si > > sa avantajeze concurenta, care-i va lua locul. > > Extinderea in tarile sarace se produce fie in > > sectoarele depasite tehnologic (textile, otel), fie > > pentru distributie, fie pentru materii prime, fie > > daca este vorba de economii in curs de > > decolare. > > > > Vezi www.unctad.org/Templates/ > > Page.asp?intItemID=1465&lang=1 - 19k, > > > http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20010501faessay4770/joseph-p-quinlan- marc-chandler/the-u-s-trade-deficit-a-dangerous-obsession.html, > > > > > > Renault nu fabrica in Romanie Megane, FranceTelecom > > e mai dependenta de Silicon Valley decat de Europa > > de Est. Se pierd locuri de munca, dar nu atat de > > multe proportional pe cat viseaza protectionistii. > > Somajul european e o consecinta a pierderii > > productivitatii si a slabiciunilor tehnologice > > relative, probleme ce nu sunt rezolvate de circa 25 > > de ani, cu exceptia unor tari "neoliberale" ca Marea > > Britanie sau social-democrate si avansate dpdv ITC > > ca Suedia. > > > > Cum convergenta reala se va realiza in decenii e > > greu de crezut ca vom asisa la o deplasare in masa a > > industriei spre Est. In schimb, imigrantii estici de > > obieci presteaza muncile pe care occidentalii le > > evita. > > > > > > hcf591 a �crit : > > In aceeasi ordine de idei de la: > > > http://www.ziua.ro/display.php?id=13641&data=2005-05-31 > > > > ....Voi incepe cu cea de-a doua, pentru ca este cea > > mai evocata in > > dezbaterile publice din Franta. Este vorba de > > asa-zisul dumping social > > si fiscal de care s-ar face vinovate tarile din > > Estul Europei. Or, in > > pofida scandalului pe care afirmatia mea l-ar starni > > in Franta, sunt > > de parere ca tocmai acest "dumping" est-european > > este sansa de > > supravietuire a Europei in contextul unei > > globalizari care favorizeaza > > economiile asiatice. Asa cum a incercat sa explice > > si Nicolas Sarkozy, > > modelul social francez este in criza si nu poate fi > > mentinut "envers > > et contre tout". Din acest punct de vedere, votul de > > duminica a > > exprimat si iluziile resentimentare ale unei stangi > > retrograde. In loc > > sa blocheze accesul est-europenilor pe piata muncii > > de la ei, > > francezii ar trebui sa recurga la retetele care s-au > > dovedit eficiente > > si anume reducerea masiva a impozitelor si mai ales > > flexibilizarea > > conditiilor de angajare. Doar o economie libera este > > cu adevarat > > sociala. Dar ce te faci cu o tara in care cuvantul > > "liberal" a ajuns > > sa fie mai rau decat o insulta? Cati politicieni mai > > au curajul sa-si > > asume aceasta eticheta? Chiar si cei de dreapta se > > complac in > > promovarea facila a unui etatism cu iz mai mult sau > > mai putin conservator. > > ... > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Alan Rosca > > wrote: > > > Respingerea Constitutiei UE in Franta reprezinta > > > alegerea securitatii pe termen scurt, cu pretul > > > bunastarii pe termen lung. > > > > > > Este o victorie a stangii protectioniste, care > > > favorizeaza protectia sociala, impotriva > > minoritatii > > > liberale, care a militat pentru reforme economice > > dure > > > dar necesare pentru asigurarea competitivitatii > > tarii > > > in economia globala. Perpetua dorinta de afirmare > > a > > > identitatii franceze mi se pare o cauza secundara. > > La > > > fel, anomalia Le Pen se incadreaza tot in > > categoria > > > protectionism/isolationism/nationalism � extremele > > se > > > atrag. > > > > > > Inteleg ca au fost si cauze strict politice ale > > > votului francez; dar cred ca majoritatea au avut > > > legatura cu refuzul populatiei de a se adapta la > > > realitatile globalizarii. Forta de munca incearca > > sa > > > mentina un status quo greu de mentinut: siguranta > > > locului de munca, protectia industriilor locale, > > > beneficii sociale ridicate; iar "managementul" > > tarii > > > este incapabil sa puna in practica masurile dure > > > necesare pentru asigurarea competitivitatii pe > > termen > > > lung - in special asigurarea flexibilitatii in > > piata > > > fortei de munca (e.g. facilitarea concedierilor si > > > scaderii salariilor; permiterea saptamanii de > > munca de > > > peste 35 ore; stimularea productivitatii muncii) > > si > > > scaderea beneficiilor/asigurarilor sociale si > > automat > > > a poverii fiscale asupra economiei private. > > > > > > Tratarea globalizarii ca o simpla optiune, la care > > > unele tari pot sa aleaga sa participe si altele > > nu, > > > este o eroare care va avea efecte in bunastarea > > > economica a celor care aleg izolarea. Francezii au > > > votat sa ramana pe un drum la capatul caruia se > > afla > > > somajul, deficitul national in crestere si > > stagflatia. > > > > > > Cu stima, > > > > > > A.R. > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site > > > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 1% din > > impozitul pe 2005 - > > detalii la > > > http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/unulasuta.php > > *** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romania_eu_list/ > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > > Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > D�couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de > > stockage pour vos mails, photos et vid�os ! > > Cr�ez votre Yahoo! Mail > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > *** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 1% din impozitul pe 2005 - > detalii la http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/unulasuta.php *** > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > D�couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de stockage pour vos mails, photos et vid�os ! > Cr�ez votre Yahoo! Mail ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Give underprivileged students the materials they need to learn. Bring education to life by funding a specific classroom project. http://us.click.yahoo.com/FHLuJD/_WnJAA/cUmLAA/RR.olB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> *** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 1% din impozitul pe 2005 - detalii la http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/unulasuta.php *** Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romania_eu_list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
