Skip to content

Thursday, Sep 2nd 2010


Kevin Doogan - Not all that is solid | New Humanist

Kevin Doogan - Not all that is solid | New Humanist

Analysis of global foreign direct investment patterns also reveals two interesting and counter-intuitive trends. FDI expands during boom periods and contracts during recessions. To blame job losses on capital migration is questionable. Secondly the lion's share of overseas investment goes to the rich rather than poor countries. Between 1980 and 2006 the developed economies' share of global FDI inward stock has grown from 56 per cent to 70 per cent, consolidating their position as the prime target for overseas investment. In other words capital moves abroad to access rich markets rather than exploit cheap labour. This shows that fears of exporting jobs are not related to the actuality of capital relocation but to the threat of jobs going overseas. Research in America, where fears of overseas job loss have a much higher profile than in Europe, shows that companies use the threat of corporate relocation in order to maintain the compliance of trade unions during contract negotiations.

Discussion

We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.

  1. Comment by: Small Girl

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 11:02

    I find this a little confusing. What am I not getting?

    “In other words capital moves abroad to access
    rich markets rather than exploit cheap labour.
    This shows that fears of exporting jobs are not
    related to the actuality of capital relocation but
    to the threat of jobs going overseas”.

    TNCs access rich markets AND exploit cheap labour at the same time. No matter who thinks they ‘make’ something bits of the product/paper/plastic/chips/dye etc etc come from elsewhere. Many goods (eg. fruit in its whole state, side of animals, mined metals and minerals) are gathered or harvested, washed and packed using cheap labour. These are exported to gateway economies where value is added through chopping and canning, filleting, repackaging in smaller quantities, putting parts into new products, maybe refining and then the end products are exported to different countries from the gateway economy. Primary goods are sourced cheaply because to access the markets there’s usually an export tariff slapped on if they want to value-add and export end products themselves. This protects the better off economies and keeps pricing stable for their own production. FDI goes into poor countries less because of unstable governments and you can only value-add to goods in their primary state by investing and that’s not required in this part of the commodity chain. This doesn’t stand for all production but a lot all the same.

    Then, in gateway economies, is capital relocation (FDI) not the same as jobs (that value-add) going overseas (more efficient gateways)?

    What do you think Donagh?

  2. Comment by: donagh

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 11:02

    The trends within globalization show that many MNCs do take advantage of economies with a lower-waged work force. However, its often just one factor in their decision to locate somewhere, not necessarily the over-riding one. Take the example of Dell in Limerick. The move to Poland was motivated by a number of incentives, effectively funded by the EU, including favourable tax breaks and grants. They also provided the same access to the European market. I’m not an expert, but this is my reading of it. There are also the FDI’s brass plate companies that operate here, where they establish an R&D division but funnel a considerable amount of their earning through that operation.

    Also, while lower-waged economies are useful to FDI in that they can make their products, such as textiles cheaper it depends on the trade restrictions or tariff that they have with whatever market they want to sell to. So, Walmart make their clothes in South America at a cost of 50c per item but sell them in the US at many multiples of that. The reason for this has more to do with the favourable trade deals that the US often forces on the weaker economies.

    Doogan’s point I think is similar to the myth about how reducing wages makes an economy more competitive. The understanding that MNCs are motivated by lower wages plays into their hands and undermines the ability of trade unions to negotiate wages based on realistic expectations.. Proinnsias Breathnach had a great post on this in Progressive Economy about this called Multinationals and Cheap Labour: Myths and Facts in which he filleted IMF economist Michael Casey’s risible argument. In an IT article Casey said that “the lack of demand in the US economy is also due to the compression of wages. This was caused by multinationals leaving en masse for cheap-labour countries.”

    As Proinnsias puts it:

    “The idea that US multinationals have been relocating jobs en masse to low-wage economies is simply not true. For a start, the great bulk (70%) of employment in US MNCs is actually located within the USA itself. An even greater proportion (80%) of overseas employment in US MNCs in located in other developed countries. This is reflected in the fact that (according to UNCTAD data) the average overseas employee of a US MNC earned almost $38,000 in wages/salaries in 2005 i.e. 86% of the average salary of all US employees in that year. These are crude averages, but the orders of magnitude are nonetheless indicative. When one allows for overseas investments by US MNCs which are primarily designed to serve local markets, it is likely that the search for cheap labour accounts for less than ten per cent of all overseas employment in US MNCs.”

    Actually, you should read the whole post and the comments.

  3. Comment by: Small Girl

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 12:02

    OK I see what you’re saying. My reading of it stops abruptly at the cheaper labour=better profits - I don’t take in the longer term consequences that lower wages has on the whole economy over time. And yes, corporate tax is a also a deciding factor for TNCs along with cheap labour and trade deals. It’s just that it’s all very complicated where you have a common market with countries of varying wage standards. Capital threatens to relocate even within Ireland, from Dundalk to across the border because workers were asked to take a 20% cut(well I only know of one instance). Corporate heads don’t think about the effects of lower wages on whole economies, that’s government’s job.

    I will check out Proinnsias’ post, thanks.

  4. Comment by: donagh

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 17:02

    Well, I agree with you that it’s a government’s job. I’ve been reading Rudolf Meidner recently, the economist for Sweden’s largest trade union, LO, and who is considered to be one of the main architects of the much famed Swedish or Nordic model. In a 1993 article in Socialist Register he analyses the failure of the Swedish model. The article covers a lot of ground, but at one point he makes that point, that it is the government’s responsibility to put a check on the free market (or the drive to increase profits by reducing wages):

    The essence of the Swedish Model, as outlined in the report to the 1951 LO Convention, was the notion that full employment and economic stability could be made compatible. We argued that anti-inflationary full employment policy had to be based on two pillars: a restrictive general economic
    policy which does not guarantee full employment, and selective labour market policy measures which absorb redundant labour.

    Swedish governments have frequently neglected the first part of the recommendation and tolerated periods of excess demand in the product and labour markets. The destabilizing effects of this inflation-prone policy were obvious already in the 1970s but became fatal in the 1980s: profits
    skyrocketed, speculation pushed property values to unsustainable heights, growth came to a stand-still and Swedish competitiveness faltered.

    It is inappropriate to blame the unions for reacting aggressively in a tight labour market nor can the market forces be faulted for acting according to
    market principles in a situation of excess profits and high liquidity.

    Profit maximization is the maxim of the free market and the capitalists did only what the textbooks prescribe. To ensure economic stability and to combat
    inflation is the responsibility of the national government - but the government had neither the courage nor the strength to play this role.

    I was going to say too, that the US Marxist economist Michael Perelman in his book Railroading Economics uses economic history to show how orthodox economists have in the past argued that high wages, rather than low wages created greater profit. But while looking for a suitable quote I came across this very interesting entry on Wal-mart, which illustrates how transnational companies do exploit low-wages in different countries to increase profits at home. http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/the-economic-crisis-the-wal-mart-economy-dimension/

    But using the search I was able to find an entry on the point he makes in Railroading Economics, which argues that increased competitiveness is less efficient, as it leads to an increased number of bankruptcies and that high wages push profits up because it promotes rapid technological change. http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2007/03/04/the-benefits-of-high-wages/

    One of my special interests is the way that commonly accepted economic theories have radical implications. For example, the idea that competition causes prices to fall towards marginal cost makes markets unworkable when marginal costs are very low compared to high fixed costs. In my book, Railroading Economics, as I showed how competitive forces were causing repetitive bankruptcies in the railroading industry in the 19th-century, so much so that the major economists in the US came to favor trusts, cartels, and monopolies. When Joseph Schumpeter revived this idea, without the slightest acknowledgment to any predecessors, he was seen as a brilliant economist. Unfortunately, none of his admirers seem to understand the radical implications of that idea.

    Another radical idea from conventional economics is that high wages promote rapid technological change. Most modern economists would accept that business attempts to economize on expensive factors, but rarely take the next step that high wages can promote rapid economic change. As I discussed in railroading economics, this idea was popular between the late 19th century and the 1920s. Unfortunately, today the idea is that high wages represent an impediment to competitiveness.

    Admittedly, the upsurge in globalization complicates the argument, but economies have the choice between competing by cutting wages — what I call the Haitian Road to Development — or making labor more expensive to encourage business to develop either high technology production techniques or better products to gain a competitive edge.

  5. Comment by: Small Girl

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 22:02

    Wow! You’ve outthunk me here. Maybe unions should be saying to government that they’ve been as equally dependent on FDI as construction and that Ireland needs a mixed economy that’s not dependent on speculation and credit to get through the next few years and prepare for future growth, and good public services provides more social stability during transition so lay off the wages cuts. Personally, while unions operate in the legalised space the state allows them, I would have liked to see them concede wage cuts ONLY IF the maybe above €80,000 earners got creased in tax(public and private alike) on a gradient scale - that would not separate workers in what emerged in the media as opposing sectors and even if they didn’t succeed they’ve have much more kudos. My income is €27,000 gross and set to drop about €4,000 this year and I’ve two school-going kids so €80,000 seems very adequate to me for having a nice life. I’m terribly disappointed the labour voice for the lower paid was not louder, these are the people who plug the economy because they spend week to week and don’t/can’t save. Plus I think most people, myself included, have unrealistic expectations about unions and economics. All I know is that a healthy society should have a strong labour movement but I’m just not sure how.

  6. Comment by: Donagh

    Feb 3rd 2010 at 23:02

    Well, I agree completely, and the impact of the budget has been mainly on the lower-paid, so you would have expected that the unions would have pushed more on tax increases. From talking to people who earn around 50K or more - I’m on considerably less but work with plenty of people who are - they barely noticed the effect of the budget. It didn’t touched them. So the recession is effecting people differently, and we can see that in the media coverage - entirely middle class. And you’re right about the need for a strong labour movement. Its the most important factor and is needed if change is going to happen.

  7. Comment by: Pope Epopt

    Feb 4th 2010 at 11:02

    Thanks Donagh and Small Girl for an illuminating discussion. I’d never heard of Perelman before. One of the valuable role ILR serves is making us aware of these forgotten voices.

    I particularly like the notion of “the Haitian Road to Development”. We could look at our lack of preparation and inability to deal with (increasingly frequent) extreme weather events as a consequence of a similar devaluing of public infrastructure as opposed to private profit. Our little problems, of course, entailed several orders of magnitude less suffering.

    Nice one on the Iceland post, by the way.

  8. Comment by: donagh

    Feb 4th 2010 at 12:02

    Thanks PE. I had meant to write a quick thing that I came across on Perelman’s site which ties in to the ERSI/private incinarator company looking to carve up waste management in this country/John Gormley story. While there is nothing wrong, per se with the ERSI coming out against a Government minister, it’s hardly surprising that they should do so to support a private company. That bias is inherent in the ERSI, especially in ‘environmental’ matters. Richard Tol after all has said that the privatization of all public utilities is the cure all for our current difficulties. While its not really a public verses private argument - that ship has sailed when it comes to waste management in this country, - it is about the ‘devaluing of public infrastructure as opposed to private profit’ as you say.

    So anyway, Perelman has a new book coming out called Invisible Handcuff, and what is great about his stuff is the way he shows how orthodox economic ideas come in and out of fashion, but also about the ideological bias behind much of economic theory. So, in light of the ERSI report, you should read the short extract from the forthcoming book that he’s just put up.

    http://michaelperelman.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/cost-benefit.pdf

    It’s about how economists put a price on a human life, and how the economist who developed the idea and who has become a prominent behavioural economist since the study was published as part of his doctoral thesis, became disillusioned with the validity of his own research. Anyway, the upshot is that the premise of the study, to see what wage demands people would make even though the work they carried out reduced their life expectancy considerably, was seriously flawed. Despite this though it was used by anti-regulation lobbiest to argue for a reduction of safeguards…oh what I am explaining it for, its better explained in the piece.

    Yes, hopefully Birgitta will be able to write something on the forthcoming bank enquiry in Iceland. As a member of Parliament she is on the committee that will review the report - it was due at the beginning of Feb but has been delayed once again. Considering the opacity of our own banking enquiry it will be interesting to hear what comes of it.

  9. Comment by: Small Girl

    Feb 4th 2010 at 16:02

    I’m not up to speed on the details of what’s going on but I will be watching how the regulators fare in our banking enquiry. And I might even go mad and check out Perelman myself. Cheers guys.

  10. Comment by: Kevin Doogan

    Feb 9th 2010 at 00:02

    Hi Folks

    If there is a wider interest in the discussion referred to in the New Humanist piece it is possible to pursue it in the book ‘New Capitalism? The Transformation of Work’ published last year by Polity

    Best wishes

  11. Comment by: D_D

    Feb 10th 2010 at 21:02

    Kevin,

    Good to hear your name on the blogosphere. Impressed about the book. Looks very interesting. Hope you are well. Not back in Glasgow? That part of Parnell Street is now our Chinatown and the old flat is no longer a shoe shop but, like everything on that block, a Chinese or, maybe, Korean restaurant. We’d never have thunk it in the 70s.

    Des D

  12. Comment by: Kevin Doogan

    Feb 14th 2010 at 19:02

    HI Des

    Great to hear from you. Living in Cardiff since leaving Dublin but working at University of Bristol.

    I will be speaking at Marxism in London this summer if you ever attend these events. If so do say hello.

    best wishes

    Kevin

  13. Comment by: Eoin O\'Mahony

    Feb 23rd 2010 at 12:02

    Coming to this late but basically MNCs want access to wealthy markets, not just cheap labour? So we have to get wealthy if we want to stay wealthy, right?

    Chasing tigers’ tails?

  14. Comment by: Donagh

    Feb 23rd 2010 at 13:02

    My God, a comment! Is this the end of our longest dry spell? We haven’t even got spam in like, a week.

    Well, in the case of Ireland, I imagine the wealthy market is access to the EU. Our low corporation tax and proximity to Europe makes the decision to move here a ’slam dunk’. What we need to made aware of though is the fact that when choosing to locate here MNCs consider access to the market to be far far more important than wage levels - contrary to what we are often told by the ‘competitiveness’ hawks.

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required, will not be published)

Best of the Web

  • Newspaper Circulation Figures

    CIRCULATION FIGURES:
    Jan - June 2010

    Irish Independent 144896
    Irish Examiner 46687
    The Irish Times 105742
    Irish Daily Star 93729
    Irish Daily Mirror 60460
    The Irish Sun 86064
    Irish Daily Mail 51338
    Weekend Herald 40933

    No comments »
  • EAPN Ireland | Workfare Won’t Work for the Unemployed

    Excellent blog post from Aiden Lloyd, on EAPN’s On the Line blog. This pretty much nails the governments ‘thinking’ behind the workfare scheme. It wants to be seen to be doing something, while doing absolutely nothing. The economic structure of the country is based on attracting foreign capital, aka laundering profits, which only really benefits a small minority. Everything else is supposed to ‘trickle down’ from this. They’re not interested in restructuring the economy to boost indiginous growth.

    Minister O’Cuiv aims to use these schemes to provide unemployed people with short-term work activity, to up-skill them and ‘get them back into the mainstream workforce as speedily as possible’. He further contends that ‘maintaining people’s employability through regular work activity will be important for getting people back into the competitive economy’. This stance is revealing and is indicative of government thinking in terms of job creation for unemployed people. It would appear that the decision has already been made that any recovery will be dependent on a general improvement in the global economy and that the immediate priority is to manage matters until this recovery comes about.

    No comments »
  • Hugh Green | Anglo Grinder

    Hugh Green, on foot of the largest profit loss in Irish history - the 8.2 bn lost by Anglo Irish Bank in six months - has started to look at the figures and its eye watering.

    Grants to Enterprise was ticking over nicely all the way through the boom, making up 5-7% of capital expenditure. Then bam! 2009 we’re up to nearly 25% of capital expenditure. Only problem is that in 2009, it’s mostly down to Anglo Irish Bank.

    And

    But seeing as we’re heading into the propaganda season leading up to the budget, talking about the ‘savings’ that will have to be made, what with the ‘fiscal austerity’ being demanded by the ‘markets’, in the form of cuts to welfare, education and health, consider austerity in relation to spending on Anglo Irish Bank.

    See chart for details.

    No comments »
  • Slavefare: government proposal is a sham

    This comment from an anonymous punter on progressive economy sums up many of my thoughts on the matter
    "The thing that annoys me most about this is that it's not a real proposal. The Department can't provide any detailed proposals because there aren't any!

    The Minister appears to have thrown a (bad) idea out there to convey the impression that something's being done to tackle our unemployment problem when the reality couldn't be further from the truth.
    He's accused unemployed people of widespread fraud, without offering them any hope of getting a real job.

    We've seen the biggest recorded job losses in the history of the state, and Minister O'Cuiv thinks the numbers are high because people are refusing jobs, or working and claiming - what jobs does he think are out there? Employers are complaining because they're inundated with applications for any job advertised, not because no-one's applying!

    No comments »
  • Social Europe Needs a New Economic Model | John Palmer at Social Europe Journal

    There is however, a deep issue at stake if defence of decent European social standards is to be placed at the heart of policy making and not to become an increasingly powerless lobby at the margins of the debate. For that to happen the European Union must surely break with an almost exclusive emphasis on GDP as the be all and end all of economic policy objectives. The time has come to replace GDP with a far wider, more socially and environmentally responsible measure of economic progress.

    No comments »
  • Michael Burke’s common on Michael Taft’s post on progressive-economy@tasc re Service exports

    In the late boom year of 2005 the Gross Value Added (GVA) of the building and construction sector was €12.9bn and industry ex bulding was €33.6bn (2009 National incomes and Accounts, Table 4). By contrast the GVA of 'Other services', which includes financial services was €67.6bn.

    If we turn to the separate Input-Output tables, the 3 categories of financial services (finance, insurance and related) comprised €32bn.

    These are very large numbers and they are based on a fiction.

    The CSO link provided by Michael Taft shows Ireland has a trade deficit in services with the US of some €17.4bn, whereas services trade with the Europe and the rest of the world is in surplus.

    1 comment »
  • New Left Project | NLP Blog

    Good post on the BBC's official response to criticism of their Panorama documentary on the Gaza flotilla
    The BBC has, predictably, “dismiss[ed]” claims that a recent Panorama documentary on the Gaza flotilla was biased towards Israel. But its response itself illustrates the crux of the problem:

    “Israel has been accused of breaking international law by seizing a Turkish ship. Israel says they were terrorists. Turkey insists they were innocent victims.”

    That same opposition was proposed throughout the documentary on the flotilla: were the activists terrorists, or were they innocent peace activists?

    No comments »
  • Companies Dodge $60 Billion in Taxes Even Tea Party Condemns - BusinessWeek

    The Double Irish’

    On advice from Ernst & Young, Forest Laboratories Ireland reorganized that year, dropping the country from its name. The newly dubbed Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. established a registered office in Hamilton, Bermuda, declaring the island its tax residence. This unit took control of licensing the patents.

    A second subsidiary in Ireland inherited the old name. It handled the manufacturing, sublicensing the rights to the patents, according to a corporate disclosure and an internal Forest flow chart tracing the arrangement that was reviewed by Bloomberg.

    The change helped the Irish subsidiary cut its effective tax rate to 2.4 percent from 10.3 percent the year before the reorganization, according to its annual reports. It did so by deducting from its taxable income the fees that went to Bermuda, which has no corporate income tax. Charlie Perkins, a spokesman for Ernst & Young, one of the so-called Big Four, declined to comment on its work for Forest.

    No comments »
  • Ireland: A recession of the banks, by the banks, and for the banks | afoe | A Fistful of Euros | European Opinion

    And yet it’s not clear that the worst is over. The banks haven’t yet made a big move on distressed home mortgages and no one is clear what will happen when forebearance is no longer a viable strategy. Notwithstanding the government’s attempts to compare tax revenue to “profile” (i.e. a very recent projection), the fact is that tax revenue is stagnant at last year’s depression-like levels despite an apparent recovery in economic statistics. And while there are those desperate hotels, the tourists will still find fussy and expensive restaurants (plus VAT).

    Are there any tricks left in the bag? The government is looking at privatization, most likely as a way to realize a large amount of cash at fairly short notice — essentially a portfolio switch of state-owned companies for all the bank liabilities it has taken on. And there are some bizarre Thatcherite echoes in the possible appearance of a poll tax by the end of the year (dressed up as a “flat rate” water charge or property tax)

    No comments »
  • How Much Did Eurozone States Spend On Bailing Out Private Banks? | Irish Public Policy

    As a percentage of GDP the Euro-area average is 25.4%, the EU 27 is 31.2%. This is about 1,870 billion for the entire Eurozone. Nothing compared to what has been allocated to the Greek government. But, get this, Ireland spent a whopping 231.8% of its GDP, massively above any other country. Most of this is accounted for by the blanket guarantee of bank liabilities.

    No comments »

Link Archives »