Sunday, February 20, 2011

Trade, Unions, and Inflation

One must first read the Post, and then assume (correctly) that both are to some degree wrong. The major loss to Trade resides in the Welfare Costs (Taxes) which each Trading partner must pay, simply to alternate political entities. The secret success of Trade consists of the ability of the Trading partner to minimize those Welfare Costs to his advantage. Domestic production always has to pay those Taxes, while foreign production can avoid those Welfare Costs, at least at the domestic level of Trade unless there is a viable Tariff. The true Winner of Trade is the Partner who pays the lowest Welfare Costs; the true Loser is the Partner who pays the highest Welfare Costs, the domestic Taxpayer, and eventually–the Consumer. One may ask about the later inclusion, but the Consumer inevitably must buy the shoddiest Product in a decaying infrastructure over the long-term.

I found this Post which is far too critical of Collective Bargaining. There must be a place for both Unions and Employers, outlawing one will not resolve any issue. I would enjoy new legislation which handled the observed Problems far better than current observation. I would enjoy a law which made Unions completely free to Join, forbidden to collectively bargain over Wages, but able to force all Employers to collectively bargain over the Unions Dues they are forced to pay per hour of Union member employment. Unions themselves would be committed to decide what level of Health Care they would provide to Union members and their families, and what level of Pension they must grant to all members past a certain Age. Employers could set their own Wage levels, Employees could decide if they wanted to Work under such level Wages, and Unions could declare Employers deficient in Unions Dues payment if labor Contracts were not reached and fulfilled under this law (Blackball those companies). Employers could still hire Scab labor, but Unions would have the right to Picket the Production facilities and Headquarters, employing Union members not gainfully employed elsewhere.

I will finish today with this Post, where James Hamilton suggests that The Days of Wine and Roses may be over; as Inflation seems to be picking up again. One can and should ask if the Fed can maintain their suppression of Interest rates under such Conditions. The Answer is No! No one but myself may have asked what happens to the federal debt if Interest rates return to say a potential of 6% per annum? I do not like the way the economy is going, but have lived through so many Booms and Busts that I can’t even tell what is a Recession anymore. lgl

No comments: