DRS112

No...they don't have jobs...or at least industrialized jobs...which is why outsourcing...praticularly of jobs that are no longer technologically advanced is appealing. There is a huge population that needs those jobs. And the host country doesn't have the money, resources, technology to provide those jobs...

And no...a lot of those jobs are not coming back....decresed market share...over compensated jobs here, increases in productivity all lead to lower employment.

But who says we want them here? The economy is not static...if it were then we would all still be making textiles....but as the product life cycle goes, those jobs were outsourced and more profitable jobs were retained here....manufacturing at that time....now that toasters are not profitable or technologically adcanced toasters are made in other countries....

BTW...coming from somebody who has worked in manufacturing since 14/15...I can tell you those jobs suck....they suck...they suck...they suck....I've got that scars up and down my hands arms and legs to prove it....they suck.

DRS112

That's even debatable....the Import Substitution policies have never worked out real well....not in the long term. Look at S. America...or India...until the 90's Hindu motors made cars that looked exactly like they came out of the 50's....why? Because there was no incentive to improve without competition....compare that with the Asian Tigers....who forced their companies to compete globally....

anhailla

Not to mention wars we can not afford

__________________
...either I go, or that wallpaper does.

Oscar Wilde

anhailla

lets throw this in for good measure

from wilki...

"John Maynard Keynes, 1st Baron Keynes (Styled: The Rt. Hon. The Lord Keynes), CB (pronounced /ˈkeɪnz/ "cains") (5 June 1883 – 21 April 1946) was a British economist whose ideas, called Keynesian economics, had a major impact on modern economic and political theory as well as on many governments' fiscal policies. He advocated interventionist government policy, by which the government would use fiscal and monetary measures to mitigate the adverse effects of economic recessions, depressions and booms. He is one of the fathers of modern theoretical macroeconomics."

__________________
...either I go, or that wallpaper does.

Oscar Wilde

DRS112

from wiki too

Analytical approaches
The traditional distinction is between two different approaches to economics: Keynesian economics, focusing on demand; and supply-side economics, focusing on supply. Neither view is typically endorsed to the complete exclusion of the other, but most schools do tend clearly to emphasize one or the other as a theoretical foundation.

Keynesian economics-The first stage of macroeconomics was a period of academic theory heavily influenced by the economist Keynes. It therefore has his name. This period focused on aggregate demand to explain levels of unemployment and the business cycle. That is, business cycle fluctuations should be reduced through fiscal policy (the government spends more or less depending on the situation) and monetary policy. Early Keynesian macroeconomics was "activist," calling for regular use of policy to stabilize the capitalist economy, while some Keynesians called for the use of incomes policies.

Neoclassical economics- For decades there existed a split between the Keynesians and classical economists, the former studying macroeconomics and the latter studying microeconomics. This schism has been resolved since the late 80s, however, and macroeconomics has evolved well into its second phase. The models Keynes used are now considered to be outdated, and new models have been designed that have greater logical consistency and are more closely related to microeconomics. The models used in macroeconomics today, however, have been built upon Keynesian models and are therefore similar. The main difference in this second stage of macroeconomics is an increased focus on monetary policy, such as interest rates and money supply. Macroeconomic theory today has harmonized the study of aggregate demand and supply with the study of money.

Malkavian

That is debatable GDP perhaps. Say, if the economy used to produce 100 $1 toys, and now makes 105, make extra $5 available for lending for qualified borrowers. The problem with that though is your GDP will increase as you increase money supply through lending and at some point will enter a vicious cycle where it'll increase thanks to inflation mainly rather than thanks to growth in the real economy... Can get counterproductive very quickly.

But i think there are ways to take GDP growth and subtract inflation from it to get an idea of real economic output... Should that output contract, more money will be available for lending (chasing fewer goods) without the need to print more. More money for lending = easier to start business during recession, and since no new money are being printed, inflation is moderated unless you really trash the economy... like 50% contraction. But in this case, nothing will save you, really. Tight money during boom times would discourage speculation, with investment funded from real profits. The idea is to create a self correcting money supply that would require minimum intervention.

__________________
Woof!

DRS112

The problem with GDP is that is does not equal productivity...GDP = Consumption + Investments + Govt. spending +(exports- imports)....and it doesn't take into account depreciation.

Malkavian

Asian Tigers are state backed... They do look for exports, but they also try very hard to protect their domestic markets. Competition is great if you have tech know how and business policies that will enable you to survive... For underdeveloped countries that is not the case a lot of the time. As time goes on however, protectionism becomes a hindrance rather than help.

__________________
Woof!

Malkavian

those too.

__________________
Woof!

DRS112

For instance...Japan only protected domestic industries such as the cement industries...and it ended up hurting them...I guess the point is that the industries that they forced to be competitive were competitive efficient and all of that good stuff...while the other ones that they protected were a drain on the economy...

The Asian Tigers were developing countries before the trade policies....right?