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