Not directly, it’s just a prod to think about the subject a bit more. The IMF wouldn’t push for this if it was of benefit to anyone but the USA and maybe Europe.
The real answer is that, if by “historically oppressed” they mean “poor”, labour costs and purchasing power there are both lower and so it will be within their means to subsidise the manufacturing that they themselves are able to consume, probably even at a lower price than China. If they’re historically oppressed but actually have money now then obviously they can just use that.
To be clear I’m mainly referring to African countries, though there are others too. Any country that isn’t presently industrialised will be prevented from developing their own industrial capacity by their Chinese competition (assuming the prices are correctly fixed). In general I think it’s bad because the lack of internationally dispersed manufacturing ownership contributes to unequal power relations between nations (i.e. imperialism and neocolonialism). A highly protected world-factory in China seems to present a viable model for world hegemony that could replace the financialist model of the United States. Both are bad.
I think they will also have to subsidise or otherwise incentivise manufacturing in their own countries to develop it but like I said their labour costs are lower than in China so they have some competitive advantage there already. I agree it’s bad that the capacity is not more distributed but I don’t believe that China’s internal subsidies will prevent any country from doing this, only post industrial countries which already have the money to buy large amounts of Chinese exports.
To do that, they would need to be open to capital controls. As it stands, money flowing into subsidized manufacturing only leads to bloat. You can’t develop industry with a privatized govt run by banks
In order to sustain industrial growth, even more than management of industrial competition, you need to foster the intellectual capacity of your industries! That means an educated population that isn’t randomly slammed by waves of unemployment that massacre skills transfer. US software industry is learning the hard way where senior devs come from (JUNIOR DEVS)
I do understand that, but that’s just life. If countries don’t take a long term view and build up their own capacity, but instead just buy the cheapest stuff right now, that won’t be ideal for them. But the solution isn’t to try to dictate other countries’ domestic economic policy, that can’t possibly work. Even if China changes its policy on this matter those countries would still have to spend the exact same amount of money to build their own manufacturing base. Tariff imports a little bit if you have to, but most importantly put that money into actually building domestic capacity for the most important things. This is just the USA trying to put off doing that because the neoliberals are addicted to sucking everyone else dry through finance capitalism and manufacturing isn’t as profitable as tech-IP rent seeking.
How does this make what he said wrong?
Not directly, it’s just a prod to think about the subject a bit more. The IMF wouldn’t push for this if it was of benefit to anyone but the USA and maybe Europe.
The real answer is that, if by “historically oppressed” they mean “poor”, labour costs and purchasing power there are both lower and so it will be within their means to subsidise the manufacturing that they themselves are able to consume, probably even at a lower price than China. If they’re historically oppressed but actually have money now then obviously they can just use that.
To be clear I’m mainly referring to African countries, though there are others too. Any country that isn’t presently industrialised will be prevented from developing their own industrial capacity by their Chinese competition (assuming the prices are correctly fixed). In general I think it’s bad because the lack of internationally dispersed manufacturing ownership contributes to unequal power relations between nations (i.e. imperialism and neocolonialism). A highly protected world-factory in China seems to present a viable model for world hegemony that could replace the financialist model of the United States. Both are bad.
I think they will also have to subsidise or otherwise incentivise manufacturing in their own countries to develop it but like I said their labour costs are lower than in China so they have some competitive advantage there already. I agree it’s bad that the capacity is not more distributed but I don’t believe that China’s internal subsidies will prevent any country from doing this, only post industrial countries which already have the money to buy large amounts of Chinese exports.
To do that, they would need to be open to capital controls. As it stands, money flowing into subsidized manufacturing only leads to bloat. You can’t develop industry with a privatized govt run by banks
In order to sustain industrial growth, even more than management of industrial competition, you need to foster the intellectual capacity of your industries! That means an educated population that isn’t randomly slammed by waves of unemployment that massacre skills transfer. US software industry is learning the hard way where senior devs come from (JUNIOR DEVS)
I think you underestimate just how effective economy of scale is. Labour is also a relatively small portion of manufacturing costs.
I do understand that, but that’s just life. If countries don’t take a long term view and build up their own capacity, but instead just buy the cheapest stuff right now, that won’t be ideal for them. But the solution isn’t to try to dictate other countries’ domestic economic policy, that can’t possibly work. Even if China changes its policy on this matter those countries would still have to spend the exact same amount of money to build their own manufacturing base. Tariff imports a little bit if you have to, but most importantly put that money into actually building domestic capacity for the most important things. This is just the USA trying to put off doing that because the neoliberals are addicted to sucking everyone else dry through finance capitalism and manufacturing isn’t as profitable as tech-IP rent seeking.