Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: future generations of engineers (was foreign engineer requirements)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Pankaj Gupta wrote:
In India or China, Missing fingers are not the issue. Staying alive is more important than missing fingers. If American manufactures spend big $$s to comply with safety issues, it is because of your prosperity & standard of living, which values missing fingers. The value of a missing finger will run higher than the $$s spent on safety compliance. In India or China, the value of a missing finger will not get you cost of one bolt (US price).
I concur.  That is key to my objection.  I believe in free AND balanced trade.  That means I don't believe it morally right for the sole reason that I can buy a given manufactured part cheaper should be based upon putting a person protected from hazzardous manufacturing practics out of work ----- and replacing that person with a foreigner whose fingers/arms or life I'm not supposed to care about.  (To me capitalism is founded also upon how one chooses to spend.)
If I run a factory in India, with all the safety compliances, my product will become costly & I will price myself out of the market, because others won't. Again CAPITALISM (read my reply to Cliff), which we have just started to embrace, and so our standard of living, has started to increase together with everything else including safety compliance. Once we reach a standard of living where a missing finger would cost more than sfety compliance, we will have the safety compliance equivalent to US standards. It cannot be the other way round.
What you describe is not capitalism as is known or practiced in the U.S., although it does share some commonality with the period of our industrial revolution.   Capitalism is not a contest to see who can 'export' pollution and job-related injuries and death.  You will find there is a general belief among Americans that they support the concept of a 'level playing field'.  Although it is not always clearly expressed or stated, the core of such beliefs is possibly a general sense of parity with respect to the social costs factored into production or service.
As for the importer in US, if he doesn't import from India, somebody else will. And if there is a law passed out against it, there will be some alternative route thru some other country, which achieves nothing except making the product maybe a little costlier, but still less expensive than US manufactured. So again CAPITALISM.....Tarriffs & protectionism would not help which will hurt the US more than anybody else.
That's a weak arguement for laissez faire economics if you ask me.  It's the same one we heard when this country was flooded with counterfeit fasteners.  "If we didn't supply them, someone else would." 
Tarriffs and protectionist measures are not solutions as you point out.  Negotiated agreements on worker safety, polution, and other rules which could be applied globally would be in keeping with fair trade.  Bottom-skimming for countries or people not in a position to protect themselves or their environment is NOT the answer in my book.
Best regards,
David Sharp