Comic Economics

In today’s “free market,” capital and goods flow freely between countries. But, due mostly to immigration laws, labor does not. We (and by we I mean all of the global community: you, me, the President, and you’re gran’s friend Lola) are allowing this supposedly free market to perpetuate and thereby create much of the poverty and inequality that exists today. How can you, moreover how can Lola -- an innocent, besides her history of sexual deviancy -- be allowing this to happen?
For starters we allow this to happen because no policy maker, no business man, and no other leader in the Western world would ever in their right mind say that immigration laws should be abolished. Few would even argue that they should be loosened. But if we understand that all the capital and goods find its way into the center where the greatest profits are to be made (the Western world), the periphery (or global South) is left not only without goods or capital, but also without the means to obtain them. Increasingly outsourcing is globalizing labor, but without the ability to move freely from state to state, labor can never truly be globalized. As half the world accumulates the earth’s wealth, the other half will have an increasingly difficult time getting any of it back.
As an example I have drawn a comic economic strip where two aliens land on a planet and the inability of one to immigrate prevents him from living life to the fullest, and potentially even from surviving. 





6 comments:
As an immigrant from a third world 'Global south' country this post is particularly poignant to me.
Firstly I think you're totally right. Capitalism and the free market doesn't place value on things such as equality and environment impact. However I don't think the answer lies in simply Ooka moving sides, because that wouldn't work on a large scale. Ooka isn't really getting much poorer, its just that Bumbi is getting richer. Stable government, education, and technology is the way to get out of poverty. The recent phenomenon of rapid global immigration isn't a shortcut to that.
I don't know kyle...I think that even if you have a stable government and a college education you can still be held back by immigration laws. Look at outsourcing in India? If those engineers could move to the US they would make much more money (that's why the jobs are outsourced). And don't you think it's unfair that captial and goods are collected to the extent of surplus in the global north while the global south has, in comparison, nothing? I agree that just disregarding all immigration laws would be crazy and the number of people overwhelming to a detrimental point but why should all slums and poverty be pushed into one half the world? If so many people immigrate here as to create slums won't that be fair? Hey Cam, love the blog, keep it up!
Charles
you have an interesting brain.
Allowing more immigration enables a wonderful source of money from the rich countries to the poor ones. We've read about and see immigrants who send lots of money home and support their relatives. With more money comes more opportunity if education standards are kept up. It seems like a kind of micro-financing. Your rich son in America has effectively financed your TV, improved food supply, better living conditions.
Oh for crying out loud!
Why dont you people at least re-read your econ 101 books and THINK!
That is the most bizarre ... ah... back to the beginning and India is indeed a good place to start.
For decades the best and brightest have come to the US and STAYED here, because there were too many obstacles to success in going home and it was just easier to send money.
NOW, there is real development going on and it goes much further than call centers.
For the third world to develop, keeping their labor there and selling to US works MUCH better.
James why don't you re-read econ 101! First off there are a number of prominent economists who agree with this idea (Friedman, The World is Flat). Second off when third world countries sell to the first world they encounter a number of problems...cash crops (leaving them with no good crops to live off of)...middle men (to whom they lose way to much money to the first world)...forced, often by the World Bank and IMF, to sell their goods a low low costs that more or less suceed in pumping resources out of the poor countries who recieve nothing but depleated farms and natural resources in return....
Basically James you're wrong. Do your own homework.
Post a Comment