Is worldwide homogenization of the costs of labor good for the American Economy & America as a free society?

Question

Please explain why because 1 word answers, like " no or yes" from gamers, contribute nothing to anybody really interested in the topic of the question nor do they further the understanding of the intelligent people who give thoughtful answers.

Answer 1

kinda sorta, but only half the time

Answer 2

No, not as things stand now. This is just my opinion, but I think that if labor costs were to be equalized wordwide that would entail an increase in the cost of labor in most places and a decrease in the cost of labor here in the US. What that means is two-fold: other countries, like Bangladesh would have much more productive labor (think well-educated, well-trained, using technology, healthy, good working habits, etc.) and therefore the cost would be higher. Contrarily, it would mean that the relative importance of highly skilled labor in the US would be decreased. That means that workers in the US would on the average earn less.

In terms of trade, this would have massive implications. This is almost a Utopian thought, disregarding the morality of it. It would most certainly be bad for the US because we depend on cheap labor abroud to manufacture and produce things, while research and technologies and higher end stuff occur here. If labor costs were homoginized and the above paragraph were not the case. Then every company in China and India would close up shop and move to the US and northern Europe because labor is so much more productive. This would mean a massive collapse to the global economy and a restructuring that means everything would cost more, a lot lot lot more. That's bad for consumers, who would buy less, which would cause many businesses to close shop.

Answer 3

No, it isn't good for our economy or America as a free society.
Some of the points brought up in the previous answers explained what would happen in the gradual decline of wages in the interest of the global economy at large. The "levelling" of wealth from country to country is the goal of many "newly developed" countries and is a shared goal in global economy.
Yet, the world philosophy does not cater to capitalism. Our country is slowly turning into a socialist country, literally practicing socialism on a global scale. Although the US is seen as the superpower, the US is held to much higher standards (environmentally, intellectual property, etc) than other countries. This leaves other competing countries at a greater advantage and of course, leaves the US struggling to compete. The homogenization only works in theory than in practice. A great example of this is the JIT theory that many American companies are trying to use. "Just In Time" is based on Japanese socialism and is now being implemented into American culture and companies. The idea that there is no longer individual freedom except in a group, is also the true sign of socialism.

Answer 4

I dont understand all the issues involved but, apart from the labor market, there are a lot of areas where a lot of protectionism is still there. Like the current deadlock in the WTO is about the rich nations including the US trying to pressurize the less developed nations to open up more and more of their protected resources like farm products to the developed nations but are not willing to reciprocate! So, maybe the US govt is trying to even out the current losses because of the homogenization of costs of the labor market.

Answer 5

It is not. Instead of buying ever more trinkets from China, et al, we should be investing in homegrown technology like automation. If we can produce without labor cost, we can sell to them and invest further in our own society and culture.

Answer 6

yeah..it's good because it will keep masses amounts of laborers from having to travel everwhere chasing after higher paid jobs and taking them away from those who can't afford to keep those jobs at lower wages.

Answer 7

I think it wont be good for the competition in the market