steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) (04/05/85)
*** The press and the legislator have picked up a disturbing metaphor to describe trade relations with Japan. The metaphor is "war." We import more from Japan than we export to Japan. The legislator seems to think that by putting up trade barriers against Japanese products the imbalance will be corrected. That seems to me to be naive. I think we should learn to cooperate with the Japanese. What are we afraid of? The Japanese say that the reason that they can manufacture things more cheaply and more reliably than we can is because they are better managers. Electronic equipment and chips manufactured in Japan are sometimes more reliable or do the job better. We do not need the government restricting our access to reliable or appropriate technology. Who is our legislator helping and who are they punishing by declaring war on Japan? Who will be the winner? What would a victory be like? What would a victory be like if we stopped and looked at other ways of solving the problem, say improving productivity and reliability so that we could compete with Japan? The current economic policies of high-interest rates to fight inflation have made US goods expensive abroad and imports cheap. In other words, we are blaming the Japanese for something we have created ourselves. I could easily imagine a situation where an American manufacturer uses Japanese chips, the legislator slaps on a trade war tax, the cost of the American product goes up and it gets wiped out by Japanese competition. I can not imagine any advantage we would get from a war with Japan. Right now in Fremont, California hundreds of people are working at the GM plant again because Toyota bought it and started producing cars there. It helps everyone. Who cares where corporate central is? -- scc!steiny Don Steiny - Personetics @ (408) 425-0382 ihnp4!pesnta -\ 109 Torrey Pine Terr. ucbvax!twg --> scc!steiny Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 fortune!idsvax -/
san@peora.UUCP (Sanjay Tikku) (04/08/85)
> *** > > We import more from Japan than we export to Japan. > The legislator seems to think that by putting up trade > barriers against Japanese products the imbalance > will be corrected. That seems to me to be naive. > > > I can not imagine any advantage we would get from > a war with Japan. Right now in Fremont, California > hundreds of people are working at the GM plant again > because Toyota bought it and started producing cars > there. It helps everyone. Who cares where corporate > central is? > > Don Steiny - Personetics @ (408) 425-0382 ihnp4!pesnta -\ > 109 Torrey Pine Terr. ucbvax!twg --> scc!steiny > Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 fortune!idsvax -/ It is not as simple as you put it. The problem of US trade deficit is multifold. It is partly due to high value of dollar(making American goods expensive), partly due to questionable product quality( making consumers prefer Japanese etc products) and partly due to Japanese trade barriers. If you think that Japanese are dealing a straight hand and only their product quality and managerial qualities earn them their trade surplus, then it is you who is naive. I suggest you do some more research into US-Japanese trade and I am sure that you will realize that what legislators are now pushing for is long overdue. Sanjay allegra!ihnp4!pesnta!peora!san
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (04/10/85)
/* san@peora.UUCP (Sanjay Tikku) / 9:41 am Apr 8, 1985 */ > > It is not as simple as you put it. The problem of US trade deficit >is multifold. It is partly due to high value of dollar(making American goods >expensive), partly due to questionable product quality( making consumers >prefer Japanese etc products) and partly due to Japanese trade barriers. > > If you think that Japanese are dealing a straight hand and only their >product quality and managerial qualities earn them their trade surplus, then >it is you who is naive. I suggest you do some more research into US-Japanese >trade and I am sure that you will realize that what legislators are now >pushing for is long overdue. > > Sanjay It may well be that the problem is caused (at least in part) by Japanese trade barriers, but there is no way that can justify protectionism. By erecting our own trade restrictions we not only hurt Japan, but we hurt Amereican consumers. Advocating such measures is tantamount to saying that the producers of particular goods are more important than the public at large. Furthermore, no one can be guaranteed the right to make a particular product at a specified price, only the right to compete; the alternative system would be ridiculously unfair and inefficient. If the Japanese trade barriers are not new (which I don't believe they are), then the purveyors of these goods knew about them for some time, and had time to adjust accordingly, i.e., to diversify. Furthermore, the fact that they haven't been clamoring about these trade barriers until now suggests that they are not the root cause of decreased exports. Michael Sykora
nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (04/12/85)
The Japanese are very protectionist on several areas: Due to a strong fish lobby, sea farming. Ask the whales. Telecommunications and telecommunication equipment. Medical equipment Electronics Forestry products. By the same token, they (must) buy arms from the USA, by treaty. They are dependent on imports in several areas (petroleum is most notable). Yesterday, PM Nakasone addressed the Japanese people, telling them that it is their national duty to buy foreign goods, as Japan would be severly hurt otherwise. -- Nyssa of Traken, now employed at Terminus Hospital, Inc. ihnp4!abnji!nyssa The cameras are still on, let the show begin! I want to hear them scream, until I'm deaf with pleasure! I want to see their limbs twist in excruciating pain! Ultimately, their blood must gush and flow through all the gutters of Varos!
pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) (04/18/85)
A story I saw on the news recently which spotlighted the mounting antagonism toward Japan by American workers and law makers. It pictured a parade of auto workers (I think) towing a Japanese-made car down the street, shouting "buy American" slogans, and pulverizing the car with hammers. It also pictured the heated rhetoric being aimed at this unfair trade by our legislators. The story reported incidents of discrimination against, and beatings of, Asian-Americans and the uneasiness felt by many of these people at these signs of racism on the increase. (Seems to bring back vivid memories of the WW II internment camps.) Americans have gotten into the habit of choosing many Japanese products over their American counterparts for their quality and economy. Consumers generally buy the product that gives them the most value. Apart from these considerations (or seemingly so) another vocal segment of American society would have both Americans and Japanese "buy American". Why? Not necessarily because American products are better, but primarily because buying American products supports the American standard of living. Now, I *do* think Japan's trade policies are unfair. They do not allow consumers in their country the same access to American goods as we allow for their products here. But what is so easily overlooked is that American trade policies with the Third World are even more unfair than Japan's are with us. Third World countries are strongly discouraged from developing manufactured products for U.S. markets (and those of other developed countries) by high import tariffs and trade restrictions. Consequently, many of these countries must depend on two or three major cash crops or raw materials for export. The price of raw materials on the world market fluctuates dramatically compared to manufactured goods, contributing to the instability of Third World economies. Multinational companies operating in the Third World generally manufacture products that are not useful to the vast majority of people in their host countries. (e.g. What use does the average Mexican have for cassette recording tapes?). These companies generally exploit the Third World for their cheap labor and have not a little influence among the ruling elite in the host countries. Purchasing products like color television sets does little to help Third World people help themselves. Instead it provides a luxury market among the poor. The poor in Mexico live in cardboard homes. Lumber and the tools needed to construct adequate shelter are very expensive (so is farm machinery, compared to coffee and bananas). One thing that many of these poor folk have, though, is a color television which will run off a car battery. A marketing success story for the developed countries, no doubt. All the screaming going on about Japan's trade practices might be a little more justified if the U.S. consistently practiced what it is preaching to Japan. Surely the American public isn't much aware of what's going on (we just enjoy relatively stable and cheap prices on bananas without realizing that the countries which produce those bananas have to produce more and more of them to buy the same amount of manufactured goods that they depend on for their productivity), but certainly our legislators--screaming so loudly in Congress--are not ignorant of the situation (But then again, it's probably not a burning issue among their constituents; Japanese trade policy is). -- Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (04/20/85)
>/* pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) / 4:09 pm Apr 18, 1985 */ >Now, I *do* think Japan's trade policies are unfair. They do >not allow consumers in their country the same access to American >goods as we allow for their products here. But what is so easily >overlooked is that American trade policies with the Third World >are even more unfair than Japan's are with us. Third World countries >are strongly discouraged from developing manufactured products for >U.S. markets (and those of other developed countries) by high import >tariffs and trade restrictions. Consequently, many of these countries >must depend on two or three major cash crops or raw materials for export. >The price of raw materials on the world market fluctuates dramatically >compared to manufactured goods, contributing to the instability of >Third World economies. >All the screaming going on about Japan's trade practices might be >a little more justified if the U.S. consistently practiced what >it is preaching to Japan. Surely the American public isn't much >aware of what's going on (we just enjoy relatively stable and cheap >prices on bananas without realizing that the countries which produce >those bananas have to produce more and more of them to buy the same >amount of manufactured goods that they depend on for their productivity), >but certainly our legislators--screaming so loudly in Congress--are >not ignorant of the situation (But then again, it's probably not >a burning issue among their constituents; Japanese trade policy is). >-- > >Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd >/* ---------- */ You are right that our trade policies with the third world stink and that the clamor for protectionism is unjustified. However, you cite the wrong reasons. Ultimately, the reason we should eliminate trade barriers to third world nations and avoid them with Japan, is that they infringe on the rights of Americans to trade with whomever they wish. They are essentially a means for certain groups to extort wealth from American consumers that they could not obtain in the marketplace voluntarily. Michael Sykora
js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) (04/23/85)
> >=Paul Dubuc > >Surely the American public isn't much > >aware of what's going on (we just enjoy relatively stable and cheap > >prices on bananas without realizing that the countries which produce > >those bananas have to produce more and more of them to buy the same > >amount of manufactured goods that they depend on for their productivity), I guess we're not aware of what's going on. Are you telling us that we are somehow forcing these countries to sell products for prices lower than others are willing to pay? If so, why don't they just well their products elsewhere? Or do you mean that the world is just unwilling to spend as much on bannannas as these countries need? -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "This statement is true."
colonel@gloria.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) (05/03/85)
["TV has cooled Cuba down, as it is cooling down America." --H.M.McL.] > The poor in Mexico live in cardboard homes. Lumber and the > tools needed to construct adequate shelter are very expensive (so > is farm machinery, compared to coffee and bananas). One thing that > many of these poor folk have, though, is a color television > which will run off a car battery. A marketing success story for the > developed countries, no doubt. Cardboard houses are very practical in dry countries. When they wear out, you can afford to replace them - they're only cardboard! For more info see (for example) _The Last Whole Earth Catalog._ And electronic communication is not necessarily a luxury. A TV can be invaluable for warning you about approaching sandstorms, platoons, and other disasters. -- Col. G. L. Sicherman ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel