Now that
this blog has identified the content for a unit of study being developed for
this blog in real time – concerning foreign trade and how that trade affects
the availability of jobs in the US – and what the unit calls on students to do
– organize a debate and carrying it out – it’s time for the next phase. This posting begins the process to set that
content in an order of presentation in formal lesson plans.
To assist in that process, below is a listing, in one place, of
all the insights the developer has presented in previous postings. This rendition will be in shorten form with
each attached footnote indicating in which posting the more lengthen form
appeared.
For this posting, he wants to give the reader an opportunity to
make his/her choices. If he/she wants to
“play” along, the idea is for the reader to go down the list and see which ones
deserve being included in the unit. To
assist making those choices, the reader might first go through list and just
arrange the insights according to how, in terms of timing, they should be
presented; that is, which would be presented first, then second, and so on.
One constraint, if this was a real-life planning, is the amount of
time a teacher has. To remind the
reader, this unit is the last unit of the course. As the last unit, it was determined that it
would be given two weeks. That is nine
class periods leaving one, last day for a unit test.
Another constraint is the determined
sophistication level of the student. At
the high school level, that would be, in terms of grade level, seniors. Not all seniors are of the same level of
accomplishment; the assumption here is that the class in question is of average
ability, but it is a class of students who have “benefited” from the
instruction associated with the previous units of the course that has led to
this final one.
The teacher, in this last unit, therefore, can count on students
knowing that they are about to organize and carry out a debate. The students have been given instruction that
has addressed several of the skills upon which good debating calls. They also know that their grades are
dependent on how well they do. After all,
while one wants to be idealistic, one lives in the real world and in that
world, grades matter.
So, here are the eighteen insights that have been identified. The clear majority of them are derived from Edward
Alden and his book, Failure to
Adjust: How Americans Got Left Behind in
the Global Economy.[1] There is one insight not taken from this
Alden source and it is so designated
The first insight is:
Displaced workers who have lost their jobs to workers of other countries
cannot follow those jobs due to practical reasons, such as language barriers.[2]
The second insight is: Along with
competition emanating from imported goods and foreign producers, there is also
competition factors relating to technology, but the ones that cause the most harm
are those that export jobs.[3]
The third insight is: Agreements among nations that have had very
detrimental effects on the availability of jobs in the US, but at the same time
have offered Americans several benefits, such as lower consumer prices. These agreements include NAFTA, WTO, and TPP.[4]
The
fourth insight is: The economic
shortfalls to certain groups of workers in the US is not due to globalization,
but the inability or aversion of the US government to adjust.[5]
The
fifth insight is: During the 1960s, the “rise of the rest,”
led by Germany and Japan, took hold.
That poses threats to the US.
Reason: failure of US to adjust
as exemplified by US maintaining high currency evaluations.[6]
The
sixth insight is: According
to Peterson memo, US policy in foreign trade was highly deficient and that the US
dominance in world trade was by then, 1971, over. The reasons were many, but underlying these
reasons was an arrogance by the US that determined all the US had to do to
maintain its vaulted position was to form the rules and regulations of
international trade.[7]
The seventh insight is: After World War II, the US’ policy to assist
devastated countries after WWII backfired as those countries did not become the
markets for US products planners foresaw.[8]
The eighth insight is: The Marshall Plan type thinking, that called
for a liberal, general foreign economic policy to Europe and Japan, was held on
to for too long a time. This effort was to
avoid resentment of defeated nations, but was by the 1970s causing the US too
much economic harm.[9]
The ninth insight is: After the initial period after World War II, low
tariffs, less regulations, floating currency valuations was stated goals of US. An example was the Trade Expansion Act (1962)
pushed by the Kennedy Administration. This
served the interests of certain economic entities such as import/export service
industry, large corporate entities, technology industries, and retail
industries, but hurt workers.[10]
The tenth insight is: Assisting the transfer of jobs abroad has
been the rise of transnational corporations (MNCs and TNCs).[11]
The eleventh insight is: Globalization in trade has lowered consumer
prices and increased the spreading of technology. Often this has been to lesser developed
nations.[12]
The twelfth insight is: The Peterson memo was judged by the State
Department as being as too dismissive of the need to establish better relations
with other nations, too nationalistic, and an encouragement to Congress to pass
higher tariffs and restrictive regulations on foreign trade.[13]
The thirteenth insight is: Often in American discourse concerning
international trade, it is portrayed as a zero-sum competition. Unfortunately, this has been accomplished by
nations, especially China and Japan, ascribing to “beggar thy neighbor”
strategies.[14]
The fourteenth insight is: In counter distinction to Asian countries, European
countries use more pro-market strategies.[15]
The fifteenth insight is: In the US, state and city governments have
become very aggressive in competing for jobs, especially in the manufacturing
sector. Some strategies are aimed at
luring such jobs from other states. Other
strategies include tax incentives (mostly tax reduction plans); but best of all
are investments in infrastructure (highways, bridges, communication facilities,
schooling and training facilities, etc.).[16]
Sixteenth insight is: More important than China’s restrictive
policies in displacing workers has been advanced technologies (artificial
intelligence, automated and electronic manufacturing and management). The result has been higher levels of
efficiency and productivity through the ability of companies to eliminate
manufacturing sector jobs. Solution: increase exports to China especially in
high-tech products such as in aviation technologies.[17]
The seventeenth insight is:
In trying to nurture domestic businesses – so that they
can bolster their prospects in foreign trade – the national government invests
in education, invests in infrastructure, and subsidizes research and
development.[18]
The eighteenth insight is:
In international trade, if a nation’s products are losing favor among
customers, then its national currency will lose value. The opposite
happens when a nation’s products become more favored by customers. Therefore,
currency values can help stabilize the balances of trade/payments among
nations. But when a nation manipulates its currency, that policy aborts
the market from arriving at such a balance.[19]
That, then, is the eighteen insights. After one reviews these insights, the chore
is to place them in order. Which will be
“taught” first, which second, and so on.
Then, the lesser important insights are eliminated. That is what this posting is hoping the
reader considers and takes part in the process if only symbolically.
Later, this development
will formulate a lesson objective (which will be further described in a future
posting), identify lesson steps, supportive materials, and any other assets
needed to teach the insight. Of course,
both previously identified factoids and concepts will be fitted-in appropriately
in the various lessons.
[1] Edward Alden, Failure to Adjust: How Americans Got Left Behind in the Global
Economy (Lanham, MD: Rowman and
Littlefield Publishers, 2016).
[2] See “Problematic
Consequences,” September 5, 2017.
[3] See “Problematic
Consequences.”
[4] See “Problematic
Consequences.”
[5] See “Is
Globalization Inevitable?”, September 8, 2017.
[7] See “Counting on a
Strong Position Too Heavily.”
[11] See “The
Face of Globalization,” September 19, 2017.
[12] See “The
Face of Globalization.”
[13] See “The
Face of Globalization.”
[14] See “Restrictive
or Liberalized,” September 22, 2017.
[15] See “Restrictive
or Liberalized.”
[16] See “Restrictive
or Liberalized.”
[17] Wang Wen, “A
US-China Trade War Would Cause Huge Damage and Benefit Nobody,” Financial Times, March 27, 2017,
accessed September 22, 2017, https://www.ft.com/content/3b49cd2a-10ad-11e7-b030-768954394623 . See “Restrictive or Liberalized.”
[18] See “To
Be Pro Market or Not,” September 26, 2017.
[19] See “To
Be Pro Market or Not.”
No comments:
Post a Comment