>There's another point of the labor union argument I don't understand,
>which that "if we let in China, it will be impossible to ever have a
>working labor clause." There are already 100 third world authoritarian
>governments in the WTO representing 2 billion people. Why would it be
>easier to get them to abide by a labor clause than 1 authoritarian
>government that rules over 1 billion people? Especially one that's got a
>relatively tight grip on economic regulation for a third world government.
>Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>Politics. Symbolic events have real political effects.
>This tends to be lost on people (present company
>excepted) who see everything as controlled by a
>monolithic ruling class. Elites are divided and
>the decisions 'They' make are the creature of
>bargaining, jawboning, public opinion, and the
>workings of their own legislatures.
>
>A no-strings admission of China is a way of saying,
>forget about labor/enviro standards. A denial keeps
>the ball in play.
Also, China is very very big. A coalition of India, China, and Brazil, say, against a labor clause would be extremely formidable.
But I think labor clauses are weak shit, so fuck them.
Doug