The basic problem in the steel industry is that finished and semi-finished steel products are being "dumped" into our domestic market at less than the cost of production in the country of origin. It is impossible for the US steel industry to compete in this type of situation. Other American industries are also faced with this type of 19th century predatory price competition.
Sincerely, Tom Lehman
Enzo Michelangeli wrote:
> Yeah, OK, but can't we just import the stuff from where it costs less to
> make?
>
> Enzo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lehman <TLEHMAN at lor.net>
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
> Date: Monday, December 14, 1998 1:31 PM
> Subject: Re: cyberutopian libertarianism
>
> >Dear Enzo,
> >
> >All this electronic stuff is very nice. I myself have worked on projects
> like
> >maximizing electric power generation while minimizing the use of expensive
> >fuels. My bosses were happy and my union brothers and me were rewarded.
> There
> >was also a nice little social benefit to this in that we were able to use
> >byproduct gas efficiently rather than see it flared off the stack.
> >
> >Enzo, the real problem is that although electronics can help control
> process
> >equipment they do little or nothing to solve basic human problems like safe
> >water, sanitary systems, irrigation, food, shelter, clothing etc. etc.
> Sure
> >electronics are nice add ons to make process equipment more efficient, but,
> they
> >are not a substitute for the process equipment itself. This is where steel
> >comes in; steel is one of the materials used to construct the process
> equipment.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Tom L.
> >
> >Enzo Michelangeli wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu>
> >> Subject: cyberutopian libertarianism
> >>
> >> >Doug Henwood wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Figures. So many of you cybertypes can be so casual about
> displacement;
> >> >> you can bounce from job to job, place to place, and survive. Not
> everyone
> >> is
> >> >> so blessed - those forces you dismiss as the "steel lobby" and
> "textile
> >> >> lobby" include lots of displaced, downsized, and disposed of workers
> >> along
> >> >> with the nationalist union tops and pampered managers.
> >>
> >> Oh, listen: what I see in Hong Kong is that everybody survived pretty
> well
> >> to a massive two-decades shift from a mass-production economy to
> nowadays'
> >> service economy (85% of the GDP, in these days). People learn new skills
> >> much faster than you believe. And besides, tell me one reason why I
> should
> >> be more concerned for the income of relatively well-fed first-world
> workers
> >> than for the one of their thirld-world would-be replacements, who earn
> fifty
> >> times less.
> >>
> >> [Michael]:
> >> >I respond with a lame telnet account:
> >> >
> >> >Yes, until you get to be about 40 and the industry considers you to be
> so
> >> >much dead meat.
> >>
> >> Hey, I'm 44 and still alive and kicking, thank you very much (despite the
> >> fact that in Cantonese "44", pronounced "say sap say", sounds like
> "Death,
> >> sure death" :-) )
> >>
> >> > You have a still immature sector where start ups are still
> >> > common, unlike the mature sectors, such as steel, coal, textiles,
> >> > but also media. Little by little, the AOLs and the Microsofts
> >> > invade this still fertile turf. As that happens, the brave
> >> > libertarianism common to that sector will dissipate.
> >>
> >> I sincerely believe I'll live long enough to see Microsoft's demise, or,
> at
> >> least, cutting to size. Not thanks to anti-trust action, but simply
> because
> >> they won't be able to move fast enough.
> >>
> >> Cheers --
> >>
> >> Enzo
> >
> >
> >