Profit and loss

[Jane Sweet]

Phil Wise wrote:
> >
> >
> George W is not entirely relevant (I assume that is the W to which you
> refer).  Despite the controversey over his election, he is a democratic head
> of state.  The protesters in Quebec and Seattle (and Melbourne) are arguing
> that before long elected governments will have little power to stop or
> enable the system they are setting up.  As I said above, I am not accusing
> Bush or anyone of being Jo Stalin.

Well, yes W is what we call our President here. I'm very
concerned about this administration, but it's too early to
tell. Of course it is the Right of Right Wing   of American
politics that has used the term "globalization" almost 
as it is being used here. The reality was then and is now
that "globalization" is a myth and regionalization (NAFTA)
has not destroyed the USA economy. 
 
When the economy sputtered here a bit, all these horror
stories, akin to the horror stories that run,  MNC are using
slave labor in China... surfaced. The claim that there would
be a
"great sucking sound" (Ross Perot)  from Mexico
(anti-imigration propaganda) if the USA signed NAFTA began
to circulate in the Press. The fear of god and loss of jobs
rhetoric about the shift to a service economy, that his 
would be a disaster, blah blah, cause the loss of
manufacturing, the
loss of competitiveness and the threat of disappearing
market shares
for USA companies... was getting the ear of people that were 
not prospering. 
 
(btw,  multinationals--the USA has over 50 of these, the EU
has 60 odd as does Japan, most other Nations States either
don't have MNCs or have one or two, the USA also has 400 odd
of the world's largest 1,000 concerns, the EU and Japan have
the lion's share of the balance, so this Americanization is
a
very complex economic development and its impact on the USA
is also an Americanization only we also have the benefit of
immigration to off-set it)

I'll have more to say about MNC and what their function is
in the world economy, but for now, consider that it's
difficult to grow an economy with big giants lumbering
about, you need small cap  growth companies. This in fact
how the USA economy earns its bread and butter. 

"Globalization," much as it has been portrayed here as an
evil, even totalitarian living creature with rights and
privileges, free to rape the world, is a myth and the same
propaganda that is being peddled in Europe and Japan about
this creature has the same  ideological function it had here
in the States, when the USA was considering NAFTA and the
economy was sputtering:  Capital wants bigger profits and
therefore more  austerity, lower social expenses, and lower
wages. 
It is in reality not at all interested in fighting for
Unions (this
is the populist rhetoric both Perot and Pat Buchcannon used
to try to get Union support, middle America support)
fighting unemployment, poverty, or the mounting
social/economic  polarization. By blaming globalization and
competitors in the rest of the world for the social
tragedies caused by the very painful re-tooling of the
economic machinery in the USA employers and politicians were
trying to evade responsibility for the consequences of their
own macroeconomic policies and microeconomic failures and
choices.