“The global economy and local stress,” The Colorado Springs Business Journal, March 2 - 8, 2012, 21.

GLOBAL ECONOMY, LOCAL STRESS

There are those, like Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, who want us to get over our economic gripes about outsourcing, and realize that by the twenty-first century things are “Made in the World.”

Forget about where something is made, and get used to the fact that the global economy is here to stay: whoever provides the cheapest labor force or raw materials is chosen. Whoever responds to a call for proposals, architects from Germany or interior designers from Brazil, is competing with the entire world, regardless of the target location.

In the Digital Age, physical or geographical location means nothing: any set of ideas or designs or drawings can be digitally transported across oceans and mountain-ranges in seconds. The Internet has connected us not only socially, but also professionally and financially. Experts can bid from anywhere to perform tasks anywhere they are needed.

I met a physician in South Africa that was reading and interpreting MRIs and X-Rays for hospitals in the United States. Her services were rendered during the day (her time), while it was night-time here. Isn’t this efficient? Doesn’t it solve our fast-pace hunger for immediate responses?

There are others, like Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics (2001), who is concerned about the optimistic view of globalization. For him, there is a fundamental asymmetry between the developed and developing countries, such that the kind of policies imposed by the former on the latter would cripple any potential benefits that could come from “the removal of barriers to free trade and the closer integration of national economies.” What is good for Germany may not be good for Egypt or even Greece (as we have recently seen).

National differences are easily observed in the laws countries enact, from tax codes to zoning and labor safety. Simply expecting the same rule of law across national borders is a folly: different cultures have different beliefs and ideals they enshrine in their laws.

It’s not that the Chinese refuse to abide by Western intellectual property laws; it’s that they have ancient traditions that find personal ownership of ideas quite perplexing. The idea that some can copyright an idea is foreign to them. And the Indians think of the legal system as an ongoing conversation whose interpretive flexibility would be dumbfounding to American lawyers.

When Adam Smith encouraged us to think in terms of the division of labor and added foreign trade as a source of national wealth (1776), he couldn’t have imagined current globalization trends. For him, trade was supposed to enrich all parties, rather than some at the expense of others. But as we look around us, we feel impoverished at the expense of Chinese and Indian ascendancy.

A befuddled President Obama was chastised by the late Steve Jobs about Apple’s labor practices. Jobs was clear in asserting that 20,000 overseas jobs (plus around 700,000 subcontractors in Asia and in Europe) “were not coming back.” Wake up, this is the real world, and not fantasy American labor-land (with about 43,000 Apple-related jobs)! But we want to make things here: we want factories to work three shifts a day, employing skilled labor at reasonable wages, the way it was a century ago.

Is the American dream of manufacturing over? The car industry is proving otherwise, with record profits at GM, Ford, and Chrysler, and added jobs from Michigan to Tennessee. Yes, two of the three got bailout money. But unlike the banks that got much more, this industry added jobs over time. While banks reduce their workforce to become more profitable, robotics on assembly lines still require human labor.

The sanctity of Jobs’ legacy should come under closer scrutiny when it comes to profiteering from cheap labor abroad while Americans are the main target consumers. Does Apple have a moral obligation to employ Americans rather than exploit Chinese workers at Foxconn? Should Apple care about the economic well-being of America? Should it sacrifice a lower profit-margin to sustain the health of the local economy?

This may sound xenophobic, even protectionist; it may sound contrary to classical economic principles of capitalism and even of communism, where the laborers of the world must unite. Instead, this is meant as an urgent reminder that the fruits of a global economy may turn out to be sour at the end.

Bud and Sam Walton would turn in their graves, unlike Jobs who didn’t care, if they knew that Wal-Mart employees can’t afford to buy the items sold there. Their efficient distribution genius wasn’t intended to increase joblessness in America and create a permanent unemployed class.

Capitalism’s dream was to make everyone more prosperous, not to make some richer at the expense of others. Can we revive the dream?

Raphael Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com Previous articles can be found at sassower.blogspot.com

  

“Setbacks and strides in Springs’ diversity appreciation,” The Colorado Springs Business Journal, August 12-18, 2011, 20.

INTERFAITH INITIATIVES

Obviously our Representative, Doug Lamborn (R), missed the sensitivity class when he was in college, calling President Obama “tar baby.” Whether or not you should still like President Obama after the latest debacle remains open for discussion, but the office of the President should be respected. And the use of an inflammatory slur in 2011 is really out of line, no matter your party affiliation.

When I travel out of the city, strangers gasp at the mention of Colorado Springs. I’ve been asked about the intolerance of Focus on the Family in regards to gays and Jews, as well as about the tone of conservative evangelical zeal. I recall the outcry against the late Ted Eastburn when he dared suggest that city employees who are gay deserved to have their partners covered by health insurance. He lost the election when Focus mobilized against his heresy and chose a religiously-appropriate candidate.

But I thought we have left all of this behind us. Business-like thinking isn’t ideological, but economical: your dollar is just as good as anyone else’s, no matter who you privately worship (if at all). But for some, like Lamborn, the only way to define themselves and their ideas is through a negative portrayal of others. Like characters in western films, they need cowboys with white hats to win against those with black hats.

One way to overcome this kind of intolerance, especially when multiculturalism has given way to religious pluralism, is through education. And UCCS, now a towering force in the city’s economy with more than 9,000 students and a growing staff to meet their needs, has risen to the occasion.

A newcomer to UCCS, Dr. Jeffrey Scholes, a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary and the University of Denver/Iliff School of Theology, has spearheaded an interfaith initiative on campus that has been awarded “The President’s Interfaith and Community Service Campus Challenge.” Yes, it’s an initiative undertaken by the same president Lamborn mocks. Yes, it’s the same president accused of not being Christian or American-born. And yes, it’s an initiative that is supposed to bring students together so as to overcome misguided conceptions of fear and hatred.   

The initiative includes this part:

Many municipalities are reducing services in a response to tighter city budgets.  In Colorado Springs this has had a huge impact on public parks with funding reduced from 20 million dollars to 3 million dollars since 2008.  As such, minimal park maintenance is being carried out and new park development (including enhanced planting) has almost ceased.  To help with this pressing environmental need, a key activity of the UCCS Interfaith Service Initiative is to establish the UCCS Park Corps of interested interfaith students. 

After an initial training period with the assistance of local landscaping experts, the UCCS Park Corps will be involved in organizing park care days consisting of trash removal, basic tree care (pruning and mulching), turf maintenance and bed care.  A tree will be planted at the end of each park care day as a further contributory gesture. 

The UCCS Park Corps will work in close collaboration with the City of Colorado Spring’s Parks, Recreation and Cultural Service to identify priority neighborhood and community parks requiring care.

Not only will interfaith activity be integrated into the city’s needs, performing tasks the city is unable to perform because of budgetary cuts, this public service will be undertaken by all the groups represented on campus: Hillel Student Group, Campus Crusade for Christ, Latter Day Saints Students Association, Secular Student Alliance, Habitat for Humanity, Navigators, Catholic Student Community, Students for Environmental Awareness and Sustainability, and Student Military Outreach.

Instead of fanning the fires of discontent and rivalry, we can bring together diverse groups. Under the auspices of educational or religious institutions, we can teach tolerance and acceptance, respect for others and ourselves. When an economic crisis strikes, it doesn’t discriminate according to religious affiliations, race, or gender. Nor does a natural disaster, like Katrina, make such discriminations. On some fundamental level, we are all in it together.

Interfaith efforts, more common in the late 1960s and early 1970s (Chicago’s Rainbow Coalition comes to mind), should be revived. UCCS’ recognition by the President of the United States is a clear indication that Colorado Springs is finally on board, changing its image of religious intolerance to a city where diversity is celebrated and harnessed for public good.

If politicians paid just a little attention to such efforts, they, too, could usher inter-political initiatives, where conservatives and liberals, anarchists and libertarians, socialists and capitalist could all join forces to benefit the job market and stimulate the economy. Just as interfaith students will take care of the parks, inter-political citizens can take care of Sharrows, libraries, and trails.    

Raphael Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS and breaks bread with people of all faiths, including atheists. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com Previous articles can be found at sassower.blogspot.com