-Andy English
-----Original Message----- From: Max Sawicky <sawicky at epinet.org> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 3:05 PM Subject: RE: Clintonoids Serve Up Mud Pie Analysis
>. . . The focus on trade
>doesn't say much to service sector workers, either, and they're 80%
>of the private sector workforce. Just 15% of U.S. workers are
>employed in manufacturing. Doug
>
>Au contraire. For workers with similar qualifications,
>a fall in manufacturing wages probably means downward
>pressure on service wages. Conversely, service workers
>have more bargaining power if there is an ample mfg
>sector to which to move.
>
>Secondly, lower mfg wages put more of an implicit tax
>burden on service workers, since they have fewer better-paid
>peers to shoulder the tax burden. There is also some prospect
>of loss on the public service side, since lower wages means
>less taxable resources, insofar as workers tend to live in
>common local jurisdictions. Less mfg'ing also leaches
>tax capacity from state and local govs because their
>retail sales taxes are less able to tax services than
>goods.
>
>If mfg workers are easier to unionize, there is a wage bargaining
>effect in that dimension as well.
>
>Having said all this, I do agree that it is possible to
>over-emphasize trade, and we are testing those limits at
>EPI every day.
>
>mbs
>