Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsri.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!peterr From: peterr@utcsri.UUCP (Peter Rowley) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: High Duties => Increased Competitiveness? Message-ID: <1397@utcsri.UUCP> Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 16:19:20 EDT Article-I.D.: utcsri.1397 Posted: Tue Sep 17 16:19:20 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 17-Sep-85 16:42:01 EDT References: <1394@utcsri.UUCP> <2188@mnetor.UUCP> <1395@utcsri.UUCP> <2197@mnetor.UUCP> Distribution: can Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto Lines: 39 OK no more simplistic statements (at least not intentionally). It appears, in any case, that there will be no "free" trade (according to the Americans), but a good chance of "freer" trade. Good. That will make it more likely that each of the loosening of trade restrictions will be examined for their impact. Apart from showing that the free trade situation is not simple, the obviously flawed example from Japan was meant to point out a counterexample to the accepted wisdom that free trade and world competitiveness go hand-in- hand. Japan developed very efficient and quality conscious industry in a sheltered trade environment with, incidentally, major guidance from the government. My point is simple. Free trade is not enough. Without other measures, it may well be detrimental. With other measures, it could possibly be the stick needed to get Canadian business and labour to try out the other measures. OK, what other measures? Basically, incentives to greater productivity via employer/employee cooperation, rewarding initiative within corporations, profit-sharing, power-sharing, and so on. Company- sponsored day-care so more of the population can work. In essence, not just the threat of free trade, but positive rewards for higher productivity. Calling free trade a threat makes me sound rather demagogic. But that is exactly what the free trade advocates think of it as when they say it will increase competitiveness. That's code for "do your job cheaper or better or both, otherwise someone else will take it from you". Think of your job; what would increase your productivity more, a threat like that (with no other changes in your company), or better management of the company? I know many people who *complain* of not getting things done because of management-- they would *like* to be more productive. But simply threatening them to become more productive won't work now, will it? Fred Williams suggest I want something for nothing if I want a freer trade arrangement to provide for displaced employees. Not at all; I am willing to pay for it with taxes. Retraining will surely cost far less in the long run than welfare, anyway. Or do you advocate quiet elimination of all those workers considered "obsolete"? p. rowley, U. Toronto