Why the End of Cheap Chinese Labor is Near

[Bud Struggle]

Last month, nearly 2,000 Chinese workers went on strike at a Honda transmission factory in southern China. The strike eventually spread across the mainland, halting production at all four of Honda's factories in China.

One Honda worker on strike posted a question online to his fellow workers: "Our parents have suffered from this cheap labor market and now they are getting old. Do we want to follow in the footsteps of our parents?"
A new generation is shaking China's labor landscape, according to Reuters With the support of the Chinese government, they are demanding higher wages. And if recent weeks are any indication, companies that depend on them to mass-produce electronics, auto parts and other goods sold around the world will answer their call.

The end of cheap Chinese labor may be near. Here are some of the most telling signs:

(watch the slide show...)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/08/why-the-end-of-cheap-chin_n_600330.html#s96152

Bottom line though--the Chinese are becoming Middle Class.

[Conquer or Die]

This is bad news for the capitalist system and bad news for Africa. Where will cheap labor come from? When the Chinese decide to start earning more of the product of their labor the white nations will be flung backward dramatically.

Two possibilities:

1. Nationalism evaporates to Free Market Corporatism

or

2. Nationalism evaporates Free Markets

Either way this is exploitation and war.

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

Without doubt, this is a good thing... no one should ever have to be at the feet of another simply because of demographics. Also, considering that China contains a large portion of the World's population for a single country, it deserves to use more resources than smaller countries like the US... not the other way around. If I have to pay a little more, I will, because in my eyes, just equality is worth more than material things.

[Ele'ill]

What's sad is that these companies can suddenly double salaries/wages. It's like 'oh yeah! You're right we were exploiting you! Guess we can't get away with that anymore!'.

[Small Geezer]

Buy all your cheap crap now!

[Nolan]

This is what made the US and Western Europe "middle class" societies. Whether or not it will be tolerated in China remains to be seen.

[Weezer]

Oh no...this doesn't look good...for capitalism.

Capitalism's entire existence and still reason it lives is because of the imbalance of wealth in the world. If more third world countries become more "middle class", the imbalance in capitalism will become more even. If China's middle class becomes proportionate to America's middle class, capitalism, and not only that, the entire world could plunge in a war over resources as I see it.

I hope the revolution comes fast.

[AK]

I hope the revolution comes fast.
Revolution is not something spontaneous. It takes years and years for an organisation to develop and build class consciousness in a majority of the working class and peasantry.

And considering this is China, I doubt they'll be rooting for "communism" anytime soon.

[Conquer or Die]

Revolution is not something spontaneous. It takes years and years for an organisation to develop and build class consciousness in a majority of the working class and peasantry.

The consciousness exists and the tools are out there more than ever before. Resistance to repression is a spontaneous act. People will find the tools and the leadership to do so.



And considering this is China, I doubt they'll be rooting for "communism" anytime soon.

China is rooting for imperialism and state capitalism and they are winning the battle. I think there was a hope amongst the ruling class that they'd liberalize so as to have a system of corporations across the globe exploiting people on an equal basis along with its white nation counterparts. Such is not the case and this means that exploiter nations will be pushed to engage in wars to counter its influence. This only means that more than ever before the people in exploiter nations will be sold a better product for sacrificing themselves for capital.

[AK]

China is rooting for imperialism and state capitalism and they are winning the battle. I think there was a hope amongst the ruling class that they'd liberalize so as to have a system of corporations across the globe exploiting people on an equal basis along with its white nation counterparts. Such is not the case and this means that exploiter nations will be pushed to engage in wars to counter its influence. This only means that more than ever before the people in exploiter nations will be sold a better product for sacrificing themselves for capital.
I actually was talking about the Chinese working class, sorry if I confused you. My mistake for not making it clearer.

[RGacky3]

Bottom line though--the Chinese are becoming Middle Class.

Becoming Middle class?

What does middle class mean? THey are still working class, they are just fighting for better conditions and pay,


Buy all your cheap crap now!

Higher prices is not nessesarily the option, (under capitalism it might me), you could also have less overhead, less advertising (paying millions for advertising), less giant CEO bonuses, but the fact is it just shows capitalism is inefficient, because they won't cut those things.


Capitalism's entire existence and still reason it lives is because of the imbalance of wealth in the world. If more third world countries become more "middle class", the imbalance in capitalism will become more even. If China's middle class becomes proportionate to America's middle class, capitalism, and not only that, the entire world could plunge in a war over resources as I see it.


They are not "middle class," "middle class" is a meaningless work, they are working class (income does'nt determine your class), also resources are not being wasted primarily through personal consumption, most of it is beint wasted in military, and through market competition.

[AK]

Bottom line though--the Chinese are becoming Middle Class.
Oh. You're one of those idiots who believes class is purely a matter of income.

And worker and boss have the same interests, amirite? :laugh:

[Bud Struggle]

Oh. You're one of those idiots who believes class is purely a matter of income.
To an extent it is the only way you can really figure class. Marxists (and those that love them) are still arguing over where doctors or artists or people that work for themselves or hourly workers that make $100 an hour belong. There's too much gray area to take it much further. so income works best for me. But in the end--all this is arbitrary. You can make up any categories you want and put people in them any way you want. There's no "science" here it's only personal preference. So if you want to believe in the Lunpen Proletariat and the Aristocrats of Labor and all of that--that's just fine. If I want to believe in an almost universal Middle Class, that's fine too. Believe whatever you want.


And worker and boss have the same interests, amirite? :laugh:
That's a little trickier--as a matter of fact as a business owner I think of that all of the time. I think part of my job as a manager is to keep the interests of the workers I don't think hat those interests are always the same, and in fact they can be much different. My job as a good manager is to keep my interests and the interests of my workers as synchronized as much as possible. It makes for very steady cash flow, well paid workers and incentivized workers.
Actually I have a plant manager to run the day to day operations of the factory--what my job as an owner is to smooth out all of the kinks in the business process and make the place as optimally efficient as possible. Part of that, a good part of that, is figuring out the changing needs of the workforce and delivering to them what they want to make them happy and productive. Companies where the manager don't do that will eventually fall behind in the competition.

[Raúl Duke]

Even if Chinese labor were to be more expensive, they can just transfer to other places like Vietnam or NK (yes, there are free-trade zones in NK, dominated by SK). There's also India.

Also, this is in one industry, has this strike wave spread to many industries?

[RGacky3]

If I want to believe in an almost universal Middle Class, that's fine too. Believe whatever you want.

Classifications only make sense when they are useful for determining the way things work, for example, you can say "we are all one class" and it sounds good, but its pointless, class is about how the system works and economics work, the Marxist Analysis is very complex and is very useful in determining the way things work, there are some inconsistancies, but ultimately its useful and accurate.


To an extent it is the only way you can really figure class. Marxists (and those that love them) are still arguing over where doctors or artists or people that work for themselves or hourly workers that make $100 an hour belong. There's too much gray area to take it much further. so income works best for me. But in the end--all this is arbitrary. You can make up any categories you want and put people in them any way you want.

Ultimately there is people who have no control over resources, people who have enough to control their own life, and people who have so much control they can control segments of society.

The majority is working class people who don't have control, they rent, or pay morgages, they live month to month, and they work for a wage,

then there are proffessionals, petty bourgoius, middle class whatever, that can own a house, have their own buisiness, or have more control over their labor.

THen there is the ruling class.

Thats a very basic outline, not as detailed and intricate as Marxist analysis, but it does the job.

You calling people middle class because they won a strike is just pointless.


think part of my job as a manager is to keep the interests of the workers I don't think hat those interests are always the same, and in fact they can be much different. My job as a good manager is to keep my interests and the interests of my workers as synchronized as much as possible. It makes for very steady cash flow, well paid workers and incentivized workers.


Ultimately, the workers goal is to make more money for less work, and the manegers is to pay less money for more work, (btw, this is'nt marxist theory, this is market theory).


Part of that, a good part of that, is figuring out the changing needs of the workforce and delivering to them what they want to make them happy and productive.

That compleatly depends, depending on the labor market, the competition, many different factors, as we have seen in the general way capitalism works, the workers are the last to get the benefits and the first to take the hit.

[Bud Struggle]

Classifications only make sense when they are useful for determining the way things work, for example, you can say "we are all one class" and it sounds good, but its pointless, class is about how the system works and economics work, the Marxist Analysis is very complex and is very useful in determining the way things work, there are some inconsistencies, but ultimately its useful and accurate. I'm sure it does a good job to explain things if you believe in those sorts of explanations. If you believe things work differently--you can find lots of other explanations on how things work. Ultimately reality is distinct and separate from the mind's classification of it. When we say the "Proletariat" we are no saying something that actually exists in reality--we are only using a convenient catigoriclazation to make reality more easy for the mind to understand. In the end you call it how you see it and I call it how I see it and both of us are discribing a chimera of reality and not reality itself.


The majority is working class people who don't have control, they rent, or pay morgages, they live month to month, and they work for a wage, There are people like that who work for wages--butto say they don' have control over their own lives is false--the material aspects of life are oonly one small facet of what life is all about.


THen there is the ruling class. Then they only rule one small part of what makes up a human life. For the most part a very insignigant part.


You calling people middle class because they won a strike is just pointless. Calling them anything is pointless. People's place in a workforce is a small part of what they are.


Ultimately, the workers goal is to make more money for less work, and the manegers is to pay less money for more work, (btw, this is'nt marxist theory, this is market theory). Whatever it is--it's back in the 1930s stuff. What people want is VERY complicated. On thing RevLEft has done--is make me a much better and more aware manage of people. for that I am very thankful.


That compleatly depends, depending on the labor market, the competition, many different factors, as we have seen in the general way capitalism works, the workers are the last to get the benefits and the first to take the hit.Often that's the case--and if those ups and downs could be mitigated it creats a happier stabler workforce. It isn't just about the money

[Jimmie Higgins]

If the workers in China want to win reforms and improvements in their workplaces, it will take a lot more than asking nicely; they have quite an epic fight ahead. Not only would they have to deal with the ample repressive capabilities of the Chinese government, but they would also have the most powerful international companies to deal with too. Even if the government wanted (I doubt this would ever happen) or felt pressure to reform labor conditions, the the government would also face a great deal of pressure from the businesses to preserve the low-wage status quo.

Check out this link from Socialist World about factory conditions at a sweatshop that manufactures the iPad. It's interesting that both China and Apple try and present an image of sleek effortless modernism but beneath it all is exploited labor.
The human cost of an iPad (http://socialistworld.net/doc/4324)

[RGacky3]

I'm sure it does a good job to explain things if you believe in those sorts of explanations. If you believe things work differently--you can find lots of other explanations on how things work. Ultimately reality is distinct and separate from the mind's classification of it. When we say the "Proletariat" we are no saying something that actually exists in reality--we are only using a convenient catigoriclazation to make reality more easy for the mind to understand. In the end you call it how you see it and I call it how I see it and both of us are discribing a chimera of reality and not reality itself.


The point of class distinctions is to understand power in society. Its not about believing how things work, its HOW THINGS WORK (facts are facts) and through that making conclusions and distinctions.

What your saying makes for a good philisophical debate. Its like classifying animals,

Mammels are classified as warm blodded, give birth to live young, lizzards are classified as cold blodded and other stuff, THAT is based on reality, and it does its job in allowing scientists to study animals.

I can define class as the color of shoes a person wears but that does'nt help me understnad power structures, to understand power structions your unerstand power, then distinguish different factors, thats where the concept of class comes from, power structures ARE real, and class analysis explains it.


There are people like that who work for wages--butto say they don' have control over their own lives is false--the material aspects of life are oonly one small facet of what life is all about.

Yeah I agree, but I mean control in a material sense (thats what we are talking about here).


Then they only rule one small part of what makes up a human life. For the most part a very insignigant part.

Yeah I know, but again, stick to what we are talking about.


Calling them anything is pointless. People's place in a workforce is a small part of what they are.

FOR GODS SAKE, we are talking about social power structures. Thats like having a discussion on food and then saying "well eating is'nt everything."


Whatever it is--it's back in the 1930s stuff. What people want is VERY complicated. On thing RevLEft has done--is make me a much better and more aware manage of people. for that I am very thankful.


No its not back in the 1930s, its the way economics and class relations work now (again, thats not what we are talking about).


Often that's the case--and if those ups and downs could be mitigated it creats a happier stabler workforce. It isn't just about the money

Yeah, but under Capitalism, ultimately ... it is.