Covering Unit #4: Labor & Trade, Human Rights, Migration, Slavery, Action for Change Flashcards
(35 cards)
What is the WTO? What does it do regarding global trade, and what does it provide for it’s members?
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an international body that was reframed in the 1990s from the former General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades (GATT) and officially established in 1995 to address modern-day issues with trade. Its primary function regarding global trade is to set the rules and enforce them when issues arise. The WTO aims to create a level playing field for global trade, and countries that want to participate must sign up and agree to these rules. It also mediates trade disputes between members. For its members, the WTO provides access to each other’s markets on even terms.
What is free-trade and what are some examples of agreements that promote free trade between
countries?
Free trade is defined as international trade where products and materials move back and forth without tariffs, quotas, or other restrictions. The idea is to remove barriers to allow for a more free movement of goods, letting the market solve issues rather than establishing rules that regulate things like environmental concerns or impacts on domestic manufacturing. Agreements designed to promote free trade between countries mentioned include the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), which later became the World Trade Organization (WTO), and NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, which eliminated barriers, including tariffs and quotas, between those three countries. The USMCA later replaced NAFTA, incorporating much of the previous agreement and continuing to maintain zero tariffs on products that had them under NAFTA.
What are some of the benefits and drawbacks to free trade?
Benefits of free trade mentioned include that it can lead to increased global wealth and more consumer choice by allowing products and materials to move across borders without restrictions like tariffs or quotas. The idea is to remove barriers to allow for a more free movement of goods, potentially raising national incomes and resulting in lower consumer prices. It can also allow countries to sell goods they are good at making at a higher price.
Drawbacks include widening inequality, as it can make some people poorer even as the national economy grows, tending to redistribute wealth and benefits from the poor to the rich. Free trade can destroy local economies and make domestic businesses less competitive. It also tends to undo health, safety, and environmental protections by removing regulations on these areas. It encourages corporations to move production offshore to find cheaper labor and fewer regulations, resulting in the loss of jobs in countries like the United States and contributing to lower wages and adverse impacts on communities when factories close. The reallocation of displaced workers can be difficult and “scarring,” leading to loss of identity and community. Free trade can also promote the displacement of people and migration as people move in search of opportunity in low-wage production zones, and is driven by multinational corporations seeking financial benefit, sometimes resulting in the exploitation and human rights violations of workers.
What are MNCs? How have the number and power of MNCs changed since the 1970s, and how
do they influence free trade and countries?
Multinational Corporations (MNCs) are entities that deliver and produce goods and/or services in at least two countries. Their number saw an explosion, growing from 7,000 globally in 1970 to over 50,000 by the year 2000. This growth coincides with the restructuring of the global economy and the financialization of the economy. As a result, MNCs have gained very strong international power, with some having budgets larger than those of many countries.
MNCs drive free trade as they stand to benefit financially in a big way from the removal of tariffs, quotas, and other restrictions. Their power and influence can limit local government’s ability to protect their citizens and their environment from harm, sometimes pitting countries against each other in a race to the bottom to attract investment. The focus of trade agreements like NAFTA was often on how to benefit the corporations involved, allowing them to use incredibly cheap labor with no environmental responsibility by moving production offshore. This drive for corporate profits is linked to the exploitation of labor and human rights issues, with MNCs influencing governments and trade organizations, even influencing policies to prevent wage increases to protect their interests.
What are tariffs and quotas, and why do countries use them? What is the benefit of having a
tariff, and what could their use lead to if implemented in a retaliatory manner?
tariffs are defined as a tax paid on a particular class of imports or exports, while quotas are used to limit the amount of a good imported. Countries use them to regulate trade, manage trade deficits, and control competition for domestically produced goods.
The benefit of having a tariff is that it can be imposed to limit competition for domestically produced goods with otherwise cheaper imports. This makes the imported goods cost more, thus making the domestically grown or manufactured items more competitively priced. For example, a tariff on avocados imported from Mexico could make U.S. grown avocados more competitive, and former President Trump tried to impose tariffs on imported steel from China to provide an advantage for U.S. steel production.
However, the back and forth additions of tariffs between countries in a retaliatory manner can lead to a “trade war”. These trade wars can trigger geopolitical feuds and have significant impacts on the economy of both countries involved, with implications that extend beyond the immediate industries that tariffs are imposed upon. Market turmoil tied to trade wars can slow global economic growth.
Explain the Braceros Program — when did it start/end, what did it allow, why was it
implemented?
the Braceros Program was a Mexican worker U.S. immigration program, officially known as the Mexican Farm Labor Supply Program. Running from 1942 to 1964, its name derived from the Spanish words for “Strong Arms”.
It was implemented during World War II as a response to labor shortages caused by the war and the increased production demands of the American war effort, as well as Americans migrating from rural to urban environments. The program was enacted as a temporary program to ensure a constant supply of cheap labor to U.S. agribusiness. It allowed for the formalized migration of approximately 4.6 to 4.8 million Mexicans to the U.S. for mostly farm and railroad jobs, primarily temporary farm work in the American Southwest.
The Mexican government sought to find jobs for returning workers after the program ended, leading to the Border Industrialization Program and the development of the Mequiladora industry. The program was ultimately created to serve the interests of American corporations and the American government, viewing workers “solely for their utility”.
What is a maquiladora? When did they start to appear in Mexico?
a maquiladora is an export-oriented processing or manufacturing facility located in export processing zones (EPZs), that produces goods for export, often for the U.S. market by taking advantage of lower Mexican wages. They started to appear in Mexico with the creation of the original maquiladora program, officially known as the Border Industrial Program, on the U.S.-Mexico border in 1964. This program was conceived as a way to absorb thousands of unemployed contract laborers who had been working in the United States during the Bracero program.
What is NAFTA? What does the acronym stand for, and what was its intent?
NAFTA stands for the North American Free Trade Agreement. It was a trade agreement signed into effect on January 1st, 1994, between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. As part of this agreement, tariffs and quantitative restrictions were eliminated progressively on trade between these three countries.
Its stated intent included strengthening friendship and cooperation, contributing to world trade, creating an expanded and secure market, reducing distortions to trade, establishing clear and mutually advantageous rules, ensuring a predictable commercial framework for business planning and investment, enhancing competitiveness, fostering creativity and innovation, promoting intellectual property rights, creating new employment opportunities and improving working conditions and living standards, consistency with environmental protection and conservation, safeguarding public welfare, promoting sustainable development, strengthening environmental laws, and protecting workers’ rights. A significant focus of NAFTA was also on how to benefit the corporations involved.
What effect did NAFTA have on the relocation of jobs between the U.S. and Mexico, as well as
within Mexico?
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) had a significant effect on the relocation of jobs.
Regarding the movement of jobs from the U.S. to Mexico, NAFTA eliminated barriers like tariffs and quantitative restrictions, which facilitated the offshoring of many manufacturing jobs from the United States to Mexico as corporations sought out cheaper labor markets. This made U.S. workers less competitive with the cheap labor available in developing countries.
Within Mexico, NAFTA contributed to the growth of the maquiladora industry on the U.S.-Mexico border by eliminating tariffs and quotas. This led to an explosion of factories in northern Mexico, attracting over a million workers, primarily migrants from southern Mexico and Central America, to take these very low-wage jobs.
However, the relocation didn’t stop in Mexico; many of the jobs created in Mexico in response to outsourcing from the U.S. were subsequently moved to even cheaper labor markets in India and China, resulting in the loss of 350,000 jobs in northern Mexico by 2001 as factories closed. This illustrates a “race to the bottom” dynamic.
How were tariffs and quotas affected by NAFTA?
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) significantly affected tariffs and quotas between the United States, Canada, and Mexico by eliminating or limiting them. As part of the agreement signed in 1994, tariffs were progressively eliminated, and quantitative restrictions (quotas) were canceled or removed on trade between these countries. By 2008, most duties and quantitative restrictions were eliminated, with limited exceptions for some agricultural products with Canada. For example, before NAFTA, avocado imports into the U.S. were banned, but NAFTA led to the removal of these restrictions, allowing a flood of avocados from Mexico. Under the USMCA, which replaced NAFTA, products that had zero tariffs under NAFTA remain at zero.
What was the effect of NAFTA on the maquiladora industry, maquiladora workers, and the communities near the maquiladoras?
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) significantly impacted the maquiladora industry by eliminating tariffs and quotas between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, which helped facilitate an explosion of factories in northern Mexico along the U.S.-Mexico border.
For maquiladora workers, NAFTA’s provisions contributed to the creation of over a million jobs in these factories, primarily filled by migrants from southern Mexico and Central America seeking opportunity. However, these jobs were characterized by extremely low pay (sometimes as little as $70 per week), toxic working conditions, exposure to chemicals, harassment by supervisors, and marginal living conditions. Workers were often treated as “commodities” or “disposable”. Many of these jobs were later lost (350,000 by 2001) as companies moved to even cheaper labor markets, leaving workers with no safety net.
For communities near the maquiladoras, the growth of the industry led border towns to mushroom into large cities. However, the factories also polluted the surrounding neighborhoods and local water supplies, leading to health problems like increased rates of cancer and birth defects for workers and families living nearby. Corporations sometimes dumped toxic waste, leaving the communities to deal with the toxic mess.
Why did the border factories in Mexico start closing in 2001, resulting in 350,000 jobs lost?
border factories (maquiladoras) in northern Mexico started closing around 2001. This occurred because manufacturing shifted towards even cheaper labor markets in Asia. Companies moved production to countries like China, India, and Indonesia, where workers were paid even less, continuing a “race to the bottom” for the lowest labor costs. This shift resulted in the loss of 350,000 jobs in northern Mexico by 2001.
Explain some of the worker conditions in the tomato and pepper industries in Mexico.
worker conditions in the tomato and pepper industries in Mexico are characterized by harsh conditions and exploitation.
Workers, often indigenous people from poor regions or migrants from southern Mexico and Central America, endure extremely low pay, sometimes as little as $8-$12 a day for working six days a week. Wages are frequently illegally withheld, often until the end of a three-month contract, trapping workers who need the money and cannot afford to leave. They are further trapped by debt bondage to company stores that charge inflated prices for necessities, often earning less than they owe and going home penniless. Escape is prevented by guards, barbed-wire fences, and threats of violence.
Living conditions in the labor camps are squalid and marginal. Camps are often rat-infested, lacking beds, functioning toilets, or reliable water supplies. Workers commonly bathe and wash in irrigation canals, including canals with snakes, while toilets are filthy or lack water, forcing workers to defecate in fields. Rooms are tiny, crudely partitioned, with concrete floors and no windows or furniture, sometimes requiring workers to sleep on cardboard or crates.
Workers are exposed to toxic working conditions, chemicals, and workplace hazards. They are treated as commodities or disposable objects of labor, facing harassment and physical mistreatment. Child labor is common on some farms, with an estimated 100,000 children under 14 picking crops that can end up in the U.S.. While U.S. companies often have ethical guidelines, enforcement is weak, and Mexican labor laws are poorly enforced, with federal inspectors facing powerful growers who resist compliance.
What effects did NAFTA have on avocado consumption in the U.S. by 2014?
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) had a significant effect on avocado consumption in the U.S. by 2014.
Before NAFTA, avocado imports into the U.S. were banned.
NAFTA, which eliminated barriers to free trade, led to the removal of these import restrictions. This allowed a “huge flood” of avocados from Mexico into the United States at a very low cost. Trade groups actively promoted increasing the demand and consumption of avocados as a result. Consequently, the consumption of avocados skyrocketed. By 2014, Americans were consuming 1.7 million pounds of avocados, which was more than double the amount eaten in 1997. To meet this demand, Americans were importing 60 percent of their avocados from Mexico by 2014.
What was Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and opening” policies designed to do in the 1970s in China? Did it work? How many people migrated out of relatively unproductive rural agriculture and into cities to do production?
Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and opening” policies began in the late 1970s. These policies were designed to transform China from a country largely closed and in a state of economic crisis into a trading country and world-class producer. This involved setting up export zones in southern China, allowing foreign direct investment, using market prices, and allowing for the mobility of labor.
These policies did work in making China a global producer and significantly increasing its exports, with China’s exports growing from roughly 2% of the world’s total to nearly 20% between 1991 and 2013. This rapid development also brought 400 million Chinese out of poverty.
As a result of this shift towards manufacturing and urban life, around 250 million people migrated out of relatively unproductive rural agriculture and into cities to do production over the course of 20 years.
How did China’s exports grow between 1991 and 2013? What effect did that have on the production of goods in competitive countries?
China’s exports grew dramatically between 1991 and 2013, increasing from roughly 2% of the world’s total to nearly 20%. This rapid increase was a result of Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and opening” policies which made China a “world-class producer” with readily available labor and land.
This growth had the effect of displacing production of goods in competitive countries, including the United States. China produced high-quality goods at low prices, making them extraordinarily competitive by world standards. The massive increase in China’s exports further exacerbated the steady decline in U.S. manufacturing that had been ongoing since the end of World War II.
While now more productive living in a city and working at a factory, how has the quality of life changed for workers who have decided to move out of rural life and into cities for factory work in China?
while Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and opening” policies led to around 250 million people migrating from rural agriculture to urban factory jobs to become a “world-class producer”, the quality of life for these workers has changed significantly, often involving harsh conditions despite potential economic opportunity compared to rural life.
Workers often face long hours, harassment by supervisors, marginal living conditions in cities, and extremely low pay. Factory work can mean no access to education and results in family separation, as many workers only return home once a year for Chinese New Year. Living quarters can be crude, with concrete floors and no furniture or windows. The sources describe workers being treated as commodities or disposable. Furthermore, when factories close, such as due to economic crises, these workers lose their jobs and fall into despair with no unemployment insurance, welfare, or savings. Overall, despite contributing to massive export growth and bringing many out of poverty, workers are still exploited, and their basic access to human rights is often denied in these factory settings.
Explain adverse distributional consequences. And, how did the types of goods being traded change in the U.S. over time? Who began receiving more of the benefits — the poor or rich?
adverse distributional consequences is an economic term meaning that even when international trade makes a country wealthier overall by increasing the size of the economic pie, it can simultaneously make some people in that country poorer in absolute terms because their slice of the pie becomes sufficiently smaller. It signifies that the “rising tide… really doesn’t lift all boats”.
Regarding the types of goods traded by the U.S., prior to China’s rise, a lot of trade was “North-North trade” between wealthy nations involving high-skill people trading high-skill goods like aircraft engines, cheese, wine, and vehicles, often based on taste or specific subsets of expertise. When China opened up and its exports grew dramatically, the U.S. began importing more low-skilled or labor-intensive products like footwear, textiles, and leather goods that required a lot of hand assembly and could be made much cheaper in China, rather than focusing on which country could make the cheapest version of a product. The U.S. continued to export skill-intensive products, but the shift in imports reduced demand for blue-collar workers.
This change in trade, combined with factors like globalization and the rise of multinational corporations driven by the pursuit of cheaper labor and resources, led to the redistribution of benefits. While overall GDP may have increased, trade tended to make high-skilled and highly educated labor better off and their wages rise, while tending to make low-skilled, manually intensive laborers worse off by reducing demand for their services, resulting in fewer jobs or lower wages. This redistribution of benefits in the U.S. generally flowed from the poor to the rich, with the income distribution focusing more towards the rich and corporations and less towards the worker.
Provide some examples of “adverse multipliers” and downstream effects.
adverse multipliers and downstream effects describe how the loss of jobs in one sector can trigger a chain reaction of negative consequences throughout a local economy and for individuals.
Specific examples from the sources include:
*When local factories close and jobs are eliminated, it has “add-on effects”.
*These lost jobs mean that former employees and the company stop buying local services like delivery or catering.
*People have less income, leading to reduced spending on things like dining out. These various reduced economic activities act as “adverse multipliers”.
*Job loss can lead to wages going down for other jobs in the area.
*It can result in higher welfare spending as people need public assistance, using benefits like unemployment, trade adjustment, disability, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, TANF, and early retirement.
*Beyond financial impacts, there is a loss of identity for workers whose job was part of their self-definition, a loss of social community from their workplace, and a sense of reduced relevance, which can lead to despair and depression.
*The decline in manufacturing jobs is associated with a corresponding decline in union membership, losing the benefits unions helped establish like better pay and working conditions.
*Increased competition, such as from China, can also lower profit margins for domestic manufacturers, leaving less money for research and development and resulting in less innovation.
What are some of the effects of free trade on labor?
free trade agreements and globalization have had significant effects on labor, primarily by incentivizing the search for the cheapest production locations globally. This has led to the offshoring of manufacturing jobs from countries like the United States to places like Mexico, and subsequently to even cheaper labor markets in Asia such as China, India, and Indonesia, creating a “race to the bottom” for labor costs.
In the United States, this shift has contributed to a major steady decline in manufacturing employment, resulting in significant job losses.
Trade has shifted the types of goods imported from high-skill to low-skilled, labor-intensive products, reducing demand for blue-collar workers. The loss of these jobs creates “adverse multipliers” and downstream effects, including reduced local economic activity, lower wages for other jobs, increased reliance on public assistance, and a loss of workers’ identity, social community, and sense of relevance. Free trade contributes to widening inequality, tending to benefit high-skilled workers while making low-skilled, manually intensive laborers worse off and generally redistributing wealth from the poor to the rich.
In developing countries like Mexico and China, while creating factory jobs in export processing zones (like maquiladoras), these roles often involve harsh working conditions, extremely low pay, long hours, lack of benefits, exposure to toxic chemicals, and marginal living conditions. Workers are frequently treated as commodities or disposable objects, with basic human rights denied. Practices like wage withholding and debt bondage to company stores trap workers. Free trade also promotes the displacement of people from rural areas or less competitive regions, leading to migration in search of these jobs, with poor enforcement of labor laws enabling the exploitation.
Explain the situation with Metales y Derivados– what was it’s purpose, who owned it, what kinds of contaminants were being released from it, why wasn’t the owner held responsible, what effect did it have on the neighborhood, etc?
Metales y Derivados was a U.S. company whose owner lived in Point Loma. Its purpose, while not explicitly stated in terms of production, involved processing car batteries, as it dumped toxic waste from them in Tijuana. The contaminants released were this toxic waste, which resulted in a huge toxic mess that poisoned the local water supply of communities.
The owner was not held responsible because they left the country, leaving the communities to ultimately pay the price. This situation occurred within a context where corporations were making incredible profits using cheap labor with no environmental responsibility.
How does the story in Last Train Home fit into the larger story of the effects of globalization and free trade on working people in both developed and developing countries?
the story in the documentary Last Train Home fits into the larger picture of the effects of globalization and free trade by providing a human-scale look at the consequences for working people in developing countries, specifically China, during its rise as a “world-class producer”. The film shows the lives of a Chinese family migrating from relatively unproductive rural agriculture into cities for factory work as a direct result of Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and opening” policies that opened China to foreign investment and used labor mobility to produce goods cheaply for export. While these policies contributed to China’s massive export growth and brought millions out of poverty, the documentary illustrates the harsh reality for the individual workers. These workers often face long hours, extremely low pay, marginal living conditions, harassment, and family separation, mirroring the exploitation found in other export processing zones like Mexico’s maquiladoras. The film challenges the idea that this shift to urban factory life is “all that it promises”, showing that basic human rights are often denied and workers are left vulnerable with no safety nets when factories close. This demonstrates the adverse distributional consequences of free trade, where even if an economy grows overall, the benefits are not shared equally, and some workers face exploitation and hardship in the global “race to the bottom” for labor costs. The migration depicted in the film also highlights how free trade promotes the displacement of people who move for opportunities that can later disappear.
What are “human rights”? How does an individual acquire such rights and who enforces them (consider both “natural law” and “positivism” perspectives).
human rights are defined as the idea that individuals intrinsically have non-negotiable entitlements. These rights are inherent in the individual, stemming from the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established by the United Nations in 1948, outlines the specific rights to which all human beings are entitled.
There are two main perspectives on how an individual acquires such rights:
1.Natural Law: This view holds that human rights are inherent in the individual, meaning each person is born with the right to life, liberty, and dignity. Under natural law, these rights cannot be taken away, even if governments enact laws that deny them; every human on Earth possesses these rights simply by being born.
2.Positivism: This perspective argues that human rights exist because states (governments) consent to them. In this case, states are the ones who define what those rights are.
Regarding enforcement, under the positivist view, states are responsible for guaranteeing the protections established by these rights and enforcing them. While efforts were made to make the rights outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights legally binding, enforcement has proven difficult in many places around the world. Organizations like Amnesty International exist and perform critical work to help defend human rights due to these enforcement challenges. The connection between corporate profits, labor exploitation, and human rights issues is also highlighted.
Provide some examples of global issues that have resulted in human rights violations.
several global issues have resulted in human rights violations:
*Globalization, Free Trade, and Multinational Corporations: The drive for cheaper labor through offshoring has led to the widespread exploitation of workers in both developed and developing countries. This exploitation manifests as harsh working conditions such as extremely low pay, long hours, harassment, lack of benefits, and exposure to toxic chemicals. Workers often endure marginal living conditions in cities or labor camps, face wage withholding and debt bondage, and are treated as commodities or disposable [71, mentioned in conversation about China]. This denies their basic human rights, including rights related to work conditions and pay. In developed countries, job loss due to offshoring leads to adverse multipliers and downstream effects, including lower wages for other jobs, increased reliance on public assistance, and a loss of workers’ identity, community, and sense of relevance, violating their right to work and potentially social security.
*Modern Slavery: This global issue itself involves the severe exploitation of people for gain. Violations include individuals being forced to work through threats, owned or controlled, dehumanized, and physically constrained. Examples in the sources include forced labor in garment factories (like those supplying U.S. consumers) and in the production of goods like Christmas ornaments, as well as debt bondage in agricultural settings, which is akin to slavery. This directly violates the human right to freedom from slavery and servitude. Slavery can be linked to economic chaos and corporate profit motives.
*Displacement and Migration: Whether driven by economic shifts due to free trade or by conflict, political unrest, or environmental factors, the displacement of people can lead to significant human rights challenges. Migrants and refugees often face harsh and unsafe living conditions with inadequate access to basic services like water, sanitation, health care, and education. Refugees, in particular, flee bad situations with no clear destination and face chaos and difficult conditions in transit and in camps, violating their rights to an adequate standard of living, health, and security.
