Liberal Globalization

\ Leave a Comment \ by

Globalization has brought huge overall benefits, but earnings for most U.S. workers — even those with college degrees — have been falling recently; inequality is greater now than at any other time in the last 70 years. Whatever the cause, the result has been a surge in protectionism. To save globalization, policymakers must spread its gains more widely. The best way to do that is by redistributing income.

Kenneth F. Scheve and Matthew J. Slaughter
From Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007

It seems the neo-liberal plans for the world are coming undone and, god forbid, they may be on the verge of calling for universal health care in the United States or something. Talking about “redistributing income” was once political mutiny. Clearly something has gone very wrong. What’s fascinating is the way they puzzle over the fact that so few– outside of the business community anyway– like globalization.

We are all mainly consumers, so of course we should thank the neo-liberals for all those open markets and cheap goods. Never mind that, according to Human Rights Watch, Wal-Mart and its ilk may in fact be violating international labor laws here and abroad. Or, perhaps we should show gratitude that 1 out of 3 U.S. jobs pay low wages (“$11.11 per hour or less”) according to the Center for Economic Policy and Research.

The “free markets” turn out to mostly create freedom for capital to maximize profits; this seems to be sinking in at some level. “Americans consistently say,” Scheve and Slaughter write, “that they would be more inclined to back trade and investment liberalization if it were linked to more support for those hurt in the process.” The Republicans seem to be choking the goose that laid the golden egg, and even Wall Street is thinking Democratic.

Posted in: Economics, Online Places, Union, Writing

Vacation Like the French

\ Leave a Comment \ by

The most astonishing revelations in Michael Moore’s Sicko have nothing to do with healthcare. They’re about vacation time. French vacation time, to be precise.

Sitting at a restaurant table with a bunch of American ex-pats in Paris, Moore is treated to a jaw-dropping recitation of the perks of social democracy: 30 days of vacation time, unlimited sick days, full child care, social workers who come to help new parents adjust to the strains and challenges of child-rearing. Walking out of the theater, I heard more envious mutterings about this scene than any other.

“Why can’t we have that?” my fellow moviegoers asked.

The first possibility is that we already do. Maybe that perfidious Michael Moore is just lying in service of his French paymasters. But sadly, no. A recent report by Rebecca Ray and John Schmitt of the Center for Economic and Policy Research suggests that Moore is, if anything, understating his case. “The United States,” they write, “is the only advanced economy in the world that does not guarantee its workers paid vacation.” Take notice of that word “only.” Every other advanced economy offers a government guarantee of paid vacation to its workforce. Britain assures its workforce of 20 days of guaranteed, compensated leave. Germany gives 24. And France gives, yes, 30.

Ezra Klein | July 19, 2007 | The American Prospect

I am not sure what I can add to this– the ongoing astonishment of Americans at just how much better things could be is, well, astonishing. The oddest thing about globalization is that Americans know so little about the globe.

Or, rather, our attention is rarely focused on the standards of the developed world, or how we might be measured against it’s standards. After two Bush presidencies how are we doing? We don’t get paid enough, we have no health insurance, and our vacations are too short. Mission accomplished.

Posted in: Economics, Miscellaneous, Union, War, Writing

FactCheckEd

\ Leave a Comment \ by

FactCheckEd.org is an educational resource for high school teachers and students. It’s designed to help students learn to cut through the fog of misinformation and deception that surrounds the many messages they’re bombarded with every day. Our site is a sister to the award-winning Annenberg Political Fact Check, which goes by the Internet address FactCheck.org. and monitors the factual accuracy of what is said in the nation’s political arena.

FactCheckEd.org, About Us

I am always a little suspicious of these sorts of projects. First, there’s the red/white/blue ‘U.S.A.’ patriotic theme. Then there’s the implied ‘one left plus one right equals fair and balanced’ liberal nonsense. Still, I think this can be a useful way to help students move from fairly simple ways of thinking about issues to fairly complex ways.

Also, I have more and more respect for their sister site, FactCheck.org, which seems honestly willing to let the chips fall where they fall. Their coverage of the debates, for example, does a good job of contrasting the hype of the Democrats with the often outright lies of the Republicans. Neither strategy is respectable, but it’s a difference that does matter.

Clinton may have lied about sex, but the Bush regime has been dishonest and violent in an unprecedented fashion. They’re now the most unpopular administration since Nixon. The Democrats are feeling less timid, and are starting to stretch the truth. The truth makes the Republicans really nervous. Where are the real independents in all of this? Politics1 has this comprehensive list of everyone running, mainstream or otherwise.

Posted in: Language, Miscellaneous, Online Places, Union, War, Writing