An economic thread

Fairthought

Junior Member
Last week, General Motors, formerly the largest corporation in America and the world, announced it had lost of $8.6 billion (US dollars) for 2005. They also announced layoffs of 25,000-30,000 jobs.

Also last week, Microsoft, world leader on PC operating systems, announced it is has set new records in revenues for the year 2005.

Similarly, Ford -another venerable American manufacturer- is struggling, and Apple -an American technology icon- is surging.

For years it has been known America's economy was transitioning from a manufacturing based industrial technology to a technology-service based economy. What some un-imaginative economists are calling a 'post-industrial economy'. This transition comes with growing pains. The labor market has to change, and those that don't make the change are left behind. But American's don't know how much more growing pains they still have in store for them in the future. Many naively believe the worst is behind them.

GM's total revenues for the year 2005 was a gargantuan $192.6 Billion compared to Microsoft's which was only $44 billion. Eventually, their positions will flip-flop. Many more thousands of factory workers will be out of work unless they learn computer programming skills. Unfortunately, even this will not make a difference. Chances are, Microsoft will outsource one third of their future jobs anyway.

Similarly, China is transitioning from an agricultural based economy to an industrial economy. Although it is feeding the largest economic expansion in the history of any nation in the world, it also comes with growing pains. Hundreds of millions of migrant workers in China have left the rural countryside seeking jobs in the special economic zones set up primarily along China's coast. This flood of workers often end up finding no work or poorly paying work characterized by the worst industrial accident rates in the world. Combined with an oppressive communist government that does not allow a single worker's strike to take place (ever) and we understand why job retention intervals in Chinese factories are short. If not for the flood of workers continually coming in form the countryside, this would be a very serious issue.

Currently, China's workforce is still 50% agricultural. That is a big change from 1980 when it was approximately 80% agricultural. In just 25 years we have seen a 30% outflow of Agricutural jobs. Even in the most advanced economies, agricultural jobs remains approximately 8% of the workforce. At this current rate, the Chinese industrial engine will exhaust its surfeit supply of workers in 35 years. This is a conservative estimate, as a populous country like china will likely need to retain more than 8% of its workforce in agriculture. The labor market will begin to constrict when the agricultural sector falls to 20% of the available workforce.

When this happens, history has shown severe societal upheavals in urban areas. When the economy needs more manpower, but the flow of new workers dries up, workers will no longer be treated like disposable tissue. Workers will assert themselves for a better life. This leads to the same sort of political turbulence that led to the sprouting of Communism revolutions just one hundred years ago. Workers will demand better safety conditions, inflationary wage demands, and will even challenge the state by staging strikes and ever bolder political protests. This will inevitably lead to higher costs of manufacturing.

This is something that every industrialized Western nation has endured. In some cases, it led to the establishment of communism and a big step backward in economic development (Russia, China, Eastern Europe). In other cases, nations formed a hybrid system of welfare/capitalism (America, Northern and Western Europe).

The American labor movement is dying. Not only is the manufacturing base eroding, but it popularity is dying. The american people blame labor unions for 'breaking' businesses into bankruptcy. This is not a fair charge as many of these businesses were bound for extinction anyway as America transitions out of manufacturing to tech-services. The labor unions are also failing to get a foothold in the IT sector, as these jobs -by their nature- are performed in a safe worker environment and already pay well above average. Besides, if a labor union of computer programmers strike for more pay, the company will just outsource overseas.

But this will change when America finally completes its transition. Then, the average job will be an IT job, and pay will not be as satisfactory as it is now. In fact, pay will go down as outsourcing continues to climb (and there is no economic reason why it shouldn't). This frustration of the workers will re-popularize the Unions which will undergo a revival. Workers will demand better pensions, better healthcare, and no more salary cuts. Strikes and protests will upset the economy. To avoid future political turbulence, the government will aquiesce. Laws will be set up to punish companies that outsource, thereby making the american worker more valuable.

The biggest reason why the American worker hasn't been hit hard by inflation is Globalism. The cost of consumer goods (textiles, electronics) has never been cheaper. Some economists insist that it is monetary policy that has chained the beast of inflation. But even Alan Greenspan, an economist of no small repute, says that gobalism is the primary reason inflation has been in check here in America. De-industrialization in America will mean America will lack the industurial capacity to replace imports. Once cost of manufacturing goes up in China, American's will be hit hard by inflation.

China's problems will coincide with America's. Both governments will set up protectionist policies to improve the lot of their workers. America needs to make their workers more valuable, and China needs to recognize the value of their workers. Cost of services and manufacturing will go up. Global trade will slow down and world economies will experience a major recession not known since before globalism was embraced by economists in the early 1990's.

I expect these events to be triggered roughly 25 years from now. By 2030, both countries will have largely completed their transitions phases. Until then, globalism will continue to feed a massive economic expansion for both China and America whose recent growth trends show sustainable rates of 7% and 3% respectively.
 

vincelee

Junior Member
and just how many economic class have you taken?

It seems that you don't have much faith in the market's ability to adjust itself safely. And where the hell did you get that the Chinese labor pool will dry up in 35 years? If everything were in a linear relationship, why do we even need economists? Have you EVER heard of diminishing marginal return? That principal goes both ways you know. Not to mention that your "analysis" didn't even take into account

1) purchasing power parity and trade effects

2) emerging markets

3) emerging suppliers

You know, last time I checked, productivity in Indan and China can go much, much higher.

why don't you just stick to liberal arts?
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
A little sweeping and a narrow in its view I think.

The economy of China is definitly about to take a major change. This change is the next step of development as the land and labour cost differential, betweem the developed coastal regions and the next tier of Inland Provinces hit a critical level, propelling larger numbers of new and established businesses to locate in the near Interior.

Recent measures will certainly help this. More liberal Banking Ownership Laws will help drive the location of Foriegn Capital in search of the best returns, whilst the progrssive relaxation of Hou to (pardon my Pinyin) laws will enable local workers to enjoy urban benefits in their own provinces and not have to migrate temporarily to the SEZ's.

Meanwhile, the Industries of the more Developed regions will continue to climb the technology tree, whilst; perhaps even more importantly, the Service Sector will continue to develop a pace (I do not mean Pet Shampoists, I mean Accountants, Solicitors, Surveyors, Architects, Civil Engineers and Property Managers etc).

As for the world of 35 years time:confused: I think if we see the current rates of growth continue for this period, the resulting world will be scarcely recognisable to one we have today. We are currently overdue the next technological revolution, by Mid Centuary China may have given us two or three.

PS don't ask me about US economy, its not my line.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
IMO countries like the US & PRC are so big, articles like that are broad generalizations and does not reflect local conditons from city to city. You can probably generalize the economic trends on city-states like Singapore and be fairly accurate, but not something the size of USA.

I work for a multi-national company's office in Orange County (California) and can describe some of the things I've seen in the IT department. 10 years ago we thought (domestic) contracting was the future and future IT employees will mostly be contractors with portable benefits. Well, after a few major flops we got rid of most of our contractors, saving the best specialists.

Then broadband internet and telecommuniting fad hit us and we thought a lot of our IT guys would all become telecommutors working from home. That flopped too and we only have a few telecommutors today.

Then the Indian IT out-source craze hit us and we thought we'd all lose our jobs and all our positions would be out-sourced to India. Well, again, after a few major flops we retained only the best Indian contractors and got rid of the rest.

What has happened, that many of us did not expect, is relocating from CA to other states. Our accountants figured out that it'd be much cheaper to operate our offices out of places like, Texas and Arizona. So we froze our hiring in California and shifted some operations to TX and AZ & started hiring there. We're not alone in this, I've seen many other companies do the same.

So, next time when you see an IT worker moan about loss of his/her job to out-sourcing, tell him to move to where the job is, and I don't mean India.
 

Aerodriver

New Member
Vincelee quote "And where the hell did you get that the Chinese labor pool will dry up in 35 years?"
I actually also read that this could well be the case, in an article in the "China Daily" Sorry it was a few days ago and I do not have a date. It talked about the influx of workers from the country supplying the labour needs but that in the future this would run out and china would need to adapt.
 

Baibar of Jalat

Junior Member
At this current rate, the Chinese industrial engine will exhaust its surfeit supply of workers in 35 years. This is a conservative estimate, as a populous country like china will likely need to retain more than 8% of its workforce in agriculture. The labor market will begin to constrict when the agricultural sector falls to 20% of the available workforce.

This is a bit of topic.

China is heading into a demographic problem. Due to the one child policy and other restrictive measures for population control, it has led to china having a rapidly aging population. in the next few decades chinas elderly will reach around 200 million. my source was on asian times but it has expired.

however it is not all doom. Chinese government could in future reverse the one child policy. with the oppurtunity for couples esp in urban areas have the ability to have more children i am 100% sure most couples would have more then the one child, for a variety of reasons. Also the use of economic benefits such as in France where families are given a few hundred euros evey month for the first year of a new childs life and other lucrative long term benefits. Has led to a significant increase in French population growth.

OR

immigration could be encouraged especially from countries in South East Asia.

The first option i believe willl be best.
 

PiSigma

"the engineer"
there was an article on the economist in the 2004 christmas special edition about china's population. it said that china might very well relax the population control to 2 kids per family. the government knows as well as anybody that one child won't work forever

also the current policy is that if rural, can have a second child if first is a daughter. if ethnic minority can have 2 or more children depends on situation. if urban, and both father and mother are single childs, they can have 2 kids.
 

vincelee

Junior Member
you see, the main issue with the Chinese labor pool drying up in 35 years crap is that it

1) assumes productivity stays the same

2) average labor requirements in growth industries stay the same

3) growth industries stay at the same absolute growth rate

If ANY one of them is not true, then your linear relationship is completely pointless. Now who the hell on Earth can say with certainty that productivity per capita can stay the same in 35 years? Let me answer that for you-NO ONE.
 

Aerodriver

New Member
Vincelee...you might want to read this..............
Experts predict that the group of people aged 65 and above would make up 20 per cent of the total population by 2035.

A country or region becomes an ageing society once people 60 years old and older make up 10 per cent of its population, or a group of 65-year-olds and above account for 7 per cent of the populace, according to the definition of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

This signifies a number of problems.

First, the Chinese society would enter a period of "population liability" by 2015, predicts by Cai Fang, director of the Labour-Related Economics Research Institute affiliated to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

During the period, the proportion of elderly people will rise up and pose challenges to social and economic development.

The term is opposed to the period of "population bonus," also an invention of Cai.

This "population bonus period" means the percentage of people of the right age for employment, or the working population, in the general population increases after the family-planning programme brings down the proportion of youngsters and babies.

During this period, labour resources are relatively abundant on the condition that the portion of ageing people has not yet become large enough.

Although society is currently under heavy employment pressure, a high bank saving rate provides a powerful driving force for economic growth. So it is a golden period for development, according to Cai.

By now, the country has enjoyed more than 20 years of "golden time" in terms of demographic benefits.

Cai's research shows that during the 20 years since 1978, the increase of labour resources contributed 24 per cent of the total gross domestic product growth.

The "favourable" demographic structure came early but will also fade quickly now that the society is ageing at an accelerating pace, Cai says.

According to Cai, the golden period "goes away 'early' because the society has not yet become rich enough to well support an ageing population. The process is `fast' because the ageing problem presents itself before the nation unexpectedly soon."

Worried that the country may face a labour resource shortage problem in the future as a result of fast ageing society, some demographic specialists and economists are asking if the country should gradually ease its family planning policies.

Economists have their minds set on the issues of economic growth.

Lin Yifu, a professor from Peking University's China Centre for Economic Research (CCER), maintains that China's comparative advantages lie in labour-intensive manufacturing. So the country's problem is not so much an excessively large population as labour resources supplies shortage.

Hu Angang, director of the Centre for China Study affiliated to Tsinghua University, suggests that population growth rate be risen moderately, arguing that India's working population would be 200 million more than China's by 2050 if China's current population policy remains unchanged.

By then the ageing problem would be extremely serious for China, he warns.


Seems a few qualified people in Chinese institutions might disagree with you regarding the possible worker shortages.Now who the hell on Earth (like the way i'm using your words vincelee) can say that the experts are wrong....Let me answer that for you-NOT YOU (sorry had to use your words again)
So when you find an expert from a chinese institution who predicts that unless current policies are not changed there will not be a labour shortage, people might pay attention to your slighty aggressive not factual based post.

Go to China Daily web page and do a search on labour+shortage for the above article.
 
Top