Protectionism

Retaliation to U.S. Protectionism: Canadian Town Penalises US companies

1 Comment » Written on April 30th, 2009 by
Categories: Protectionism
John Ivison: Canada starts to feel the bite of new U.S. protectionism:
President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes a section that stipulates all iron, steel and manufactured goods used in projects paid for with stimulus funding must be sourced from the U.S. When he came to Ottawa, the President re-assured Canadians that the stimulus package would be subject to NAFTA and World Trade Organization rules, which specifically bar discriminatory practices.

However, those agreements don’t apply at sub-national level and Canadian companies like Hayward Gordon say they are already being squeezed out of projects at state and municipal level, even if those projects are funded with federal dollars.

Worse is likely to come, since new legislation governing the billions of dollars to be spent by municipalities in the U.S. on drinking water improvements include the same Buy America provisions. The Water Quality Investment Act has already passed through the House of Representatives, replete with language that bars foreign firms from bidding on waste and sewer infrastructure projects, and the legislation is set to begin debate in the U.S. Senate next week.

...

The inevitable response in Canada has been a call for retaliation. “My members are saying ‘I’m being locked out of the American market but Americans have unfettered access to Canadian procurement’. There are growing pressures to have Canadian municipalities impose some reciprocal provisions,” he said.

The Town of Halton Hills has already passed a resolution that stipulates only companies from countries that have not imposed their own trade barriers can compete for infrastructure projects. “This supports the notion of free trade and is very distinct from a Buy Canada resolution,” said Mr. Hayward, who promoted the resolution’s adoption. “Halton Hills is a small town and this action is largely symbolic. But it will be presented to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and if they acted it would not just be symbolic.”

Funny. Buy American will eventually mean only Americans will be allowed to.

Delta says goodbye to Indian Call Centers

7 comments Written on April 19th, 2009 by
Categories: Protectionism
WSJ: Delta Air Ends Use of India Call Centers
Delta Air Lines Inc. said Friday it has stopped using India-based call centers to handle sales and reservations, making it the latest U.S. company to decide the cost benefits of directing calls offshore are outweighed by the backlash from customers.

Delta said it stopped routing calls to India-based call centers over the first three months of the year. Customers had complained they had trouble communicating with Indian agents, the airline said. Last month, Chrysler LLC said it would move its customer-service center back from India.

"It is fundamentally cheaper to do it in India, but there's also the question of whether it's better to do it cheaper or better to do it better in terms of the relationship with your customers," said Ben Trowbridge, chief executive of Alsbridge Inc., a Dallas-based company that advises on outsourcing.

Call-center representatives in India earn roughly $500 a month, or about one-sixth the salary of their U.S.-based counterparts, he added.

Delta's move also reflects the need for airlines to streamline their sales and reservation operations as customer-call volume dwindles amid the ongoing recession. And, as layoffs mount in the U.S., it could be a smart public-relations move for companies to cut their outsourced business before eliminating payroll positions.

...

Last week, SLM Corp., the student lender known as Sallie Mae, said it would return to the U.S. 2,000 jobs it outsources in India, the Philippines and Mexico. The jobs, mostly call-center and information-technology positions, were recently moved overseas as part of a plan to trim 4,000 jobs from the company's overall U.S. payroll of 12,000 employees.

And United said earlier this year it is also moving some India-based phone work back to the U.S.

In the 2000 bust, companies scrambled to outsource work to India; the cost saving was enormous. Lessons from this: In a recession, cost-arbitrage matters. In a depression [okay, a "deep recession"], it doesn't. All the accent issues etc. are just fronts for the public distaste for outsourcing, and it fosters protectionism. Which, eventually, is loser-ism. (this goes for India too, remember the Chinese toys ban)

I look at it as a fantastic thing. First, these outsourcers paid no local taxes. That gets me pissed off. Then, by their lower tax structure, their glory ensured that development for the local market just died - software development for India remains pathetic and urban focussed. And finally, by dwelling on cost-arb they refused to innovate in ways that would truly change the world.

The more jobs lost in outsourcing, the better. We need to get out of our comfort zone. America doesn't seem to want to stop buying BMWs or Toyotas; the products do better, and can cost more than their competition. We gotta get up there, not down at the call-center operator level.

Retaliation: Mexico Imposes Trade Restrictions on American Goods

No Comments » Written on March 17th, 2009 by
Categories: Protectionism
BBC: US law sparks Mexican trade row
Mexico will impose higher tariffs on a range of US goods in retaliation for a "protectionist" law passed in the US, Mexico's economy secretary has said.

Last week the US government stopped a pilot scheme which had allowed Mexican lorries to use roads in the US.

And the UK has a "migrant fee":
Foreign students and workers from outside the European Union will be required to pay a “migrant” fee of £50 each before they are allowed into Britain under new rules to be introduced next month as part of a phased shake-up of the immigration system.
Australia doesn't want migrants to compete with local jobs:
Australia has said it will cut the number of skilled foreign workers it accepts by 14% to safeguard local jobs.

Immigration Minister Chris Evans announced the cut, the first by the country in 10 years.

Mr Evans said the government did not want to admit people who would compete with Australians for limited jobs amid the global financial crisis.

The scene is like this:
1) Developed countries attempt to protect their jobs
2) Developing countries will tax imports to retaliate.

This is bad for economies in general; the alternative will be to set up free trade only between developing nations. The developed world is f***ed anyhow.

Advertisement Getting cheap web hosting or dedicated hosting is not a matter. You can find lot of free domain name registration providers on the internet. There are also different companies offering web design and cheap seo services.

Protectionism will hit Employment, not Goods

2 comments Written on March 9th, 2009 by
Categories: Protectionism
From the Wall Street Journal:
On Wednesday U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown addressed the U.S. Congress, striking an antiprotectionist note. But with the U.K. in a deepening recession, the British appear to be undergoing a mood swing when it comes to globalization. The small band of Italians [working at an oil refinery] became the focus of wildcat strikes last month by an estimated 2,000 workers at power plants and refineries across the U.K. Their message: British jobs for British workers.

...

Government figures indicate the number of British workers in the country declined by 234,000, to 27 million, in the last quarter of 2008 from the year-earlier period, while the number of foreign workers climbed 175,000, to 2.4 million.

That's why seemingly routine events now can provoke outrage in some quarters, like the recent award by the government to a Japanese-led consortium of a contract to build and maintain a fleet of high-powered trains. Bob Laxton, the member of Parliament for Derby, the city with the U.K.'s last train manufacturer, called it "a crass decision which gives the Japanese an opportunity of getting into the U.K. market." The government says parts of the train will be manufactured in the U.K.

...

As the government spends billions on bailouts, some taxpayers are demanding the money be spent at home. "Of course the cash should be kept in Britain," says Trevor Oliver, who runs Oliver Construction Ltd. in Immingham. "You can't be a global family, you look after your own family."

This time it won't be about banning foreign goods. No, that is an old-economy-measure, and a large part of world manufacturing is global anyhow, especially in the US and UK. Plus, not "buying" abroad creates the problem that they gotta sell their goods in foreign countries - Coke and Prudential aren't restricted to their home countries.

So the only way things will change is to stop employment of foreigners. The distinction is strange in the US where a large majority of people descend from, or are immigrants. Less, but still strange in the UK where it's entirely likely a bloke from the south of Britain finds himself a foreigner in Norfolk.

Lashing out against Italians or Frenchmen is a farce. The real target of this "protectionism" is likely be those that seem to have eaten away at every level of job, from taxi drivers, to restaurants to technology workers and investment bankers. Indians and Chinese people.

It's apparent in the Gulf, at least, that when the economic scenario changes the first to go were the Indians. Nothing wrong with that - it was in the contract, and in the Visa. They were there for a job. No job, no stay. (This is true with H1-Bs in the US as well. No Job, No H1-B, and no legit reason to stay in the US)

"Buy American" or "Buy British" now means "don't employ foreigners". I'm quite ambivalent to that, as an Indian; on the upside, it provides some of that quality talent to India.