Conventional wisdom says that globalization and technological changes are a key driver to declining rates of unionization in industrialized countries. A new report, “Politics Matter: Changes in Unionization Rates in Rich Countries, 1960-2010,” released by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) shows that conventional wisdom is wrong and that national politics are a much more important factor.

As noted in the above video, falling levels of unionization are directly related to rising income inequality. Of the 21 countries included in the CEPR study, the United States has the lowest rate of union coverage (the percentage of citizens covered by collective bargaining contracts) at 13 percent. A few countries have lower rates of union membership, but they all have higher rates of coverage than the U.S. Only Japan and New Zealand join the U.S. at coverage rates under 30 percent. Nearly half of the countries included in the study had coverage rates over 74 percent, led by Austria at 99 percent.

More details on the full report:

Continue reading »

Remember when they explained to us we needed to have the Republicans in charge "because they're good with money"? Remember how excited the Villagers were about having a Harvard MBA president? Ah, good times!

The deep river of private money that helped knit together the global economy has abruptly dried up, new government figures show.

As the global financial crisis grew more severe this summer, foreigners sold almost $90 billion of U.S. securities — the greatest quarterly fire sale by overseas investors since the government began keeping track in 1960. U.S. investors also are retrenching; they unloaded about $85 billion worth of foreign holdings in the quarter, says the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis.

"We've had a global panic. Everyone is pulling their money home," says economist Adam Posen of the Peterson Institute in Washington, D.C.

That's bad for economic growth in the U.S. because it threatens to starve capital-hungry companies and entrepreneurs. But it's especially serious for emerging-market countries that rely heavily on outside financing. Capital flows into countries such as South Korea, Turkey and Brazil were evaporating even before the mid-September Lehman Bros. bankruptcy made things worse.

The reversal of private capital flows signals an abrupt end to a nearly two-decades-long era of financial globalization, says economist Brad Setser of the Council on Foreign Relations. Private flows into and out of the U.S. for purchases of stocks, corporate bonds and federal agency bonds have dropped from around 18% of economic output to near zero "in a remarkably short period of time," Setser says.

Now you know why Bush requires a signed loyalty oath to attend one of his speeches. Can you imagine this happening here?

International Herald Tribune: Tony Blair received a tense farewell Tuesday in his last speech as prime minister to the annual gathering of Britain's labor unions.More than a dozen activists walked out as he began speaking to protest his pro-business stance and aggressive foreign policy. Many others booed and hissed as he mentioned controversial topics like Iraq.

[..] He was heckled repeatedly during his 30-minute speech on economic globalization and grilled on employment issues during a combative question-and-answer session afterward.

[..] About 20 demonstrators stood at the start of the speech holding placards that said "Go Now!" Others booed as Blair was introduced and more than a dozen walked out - followed by TV cameras - as he began.

The prime minister jokingly thanked the delegates "for that fine introduction - more or less."

Some of the roughly 1,000 who remained in the hall shouted and heckled when Blair mentioned Iraq, Afghanistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and his overhaul of Britain's public services, all issues on which he has angered many Labour Party stalwarts. Read on...

I always get a big kick out of watching Blair in the raucous House of Commons sessions on C-Span. Wouldn't it be great if we had a similar situation here in the US, where Bush would have to face other elected officials publicly and respond to them off the cuff?

Thomas Friedman's new book talks about a revolution that we are missing out on and nobody is talking about; the mind.

From the NY TIMES: (it's a long article, but a much needed wake-up call)

I interviewed Indian entrepreneurs who wanted to prepare my taxes from Bangalore, read my X-rays from Bangalore, trace my lost luggage from Bangalore and write my new software from Bangalore. The longer I was there, the more upset I became -- upset at the realization that while I had been off covering the 9/11 wars, globalization had entered a whole new phase, and I had missed it...

What China's leaders really want is that the next generation of underwear and airplane wings not just be ''made in China'' but also be ''designed in China.'' And that is where things are heading. So in 30 years we will have gone from ''sold in China'' to ''made in China'' to ''designed in China'' to ''dreamed up in China'' -- or from China as collaborator with the worldwide manufacturers on nothing to China as a low-cost, high-quality, hyperefficient collaborator with worldwide manufacturers on everything.

Update: Blonde Sense puts in their two cents!

On the radio today, Friedman also said that instead of worrying about Social Security, the President would be better off getting our youth invigorated to learn and attack the energy crisis we face because India and China are years ahead of us.

The Trans Pacific Trade Agreement is worse than NAFTA.

When you hear anyone from the big multinationals or Wall Street using the word "reform," watch out! The way they use the word, it means give them more and We, the People get less. They want to "reform" Social Security, "reform" Medicare and "reform" the income tax code. And now they want to "reform" the taxes corporations pay on money made outside the US. It's like "reforming" an oak tree with an ax.

$420 Billion In Taxes Owed

American corporations are holding a lot of (their shareholders') cash "outside of the country." (But not really outside.) HOW much money are we talking about? Approximately $1.2 trillion as of last March. This is money these companies have made in international profits, owed to their shareholders or potentially used for investment in US jobs, facilities and equipment. But they won't bring the money back to the US because they would have to pay taxes if they did. Instead they are holding it "outside of the country" and pushing for "reform" -- meaning let them out of their tax bill. If this $1.2 trillion were repatriated and taxed at the full corporate tax rate of 35% this would bring an additional $420 billion to the treasury for We, the People to use to rebuild our infrastructure, etc.

Continue reading »