Talk:Global labor arbitrage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 January 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This article probably cannot be fixed. Referring to people who have lost their jobs as "victims", phrases like "population explosion", "mass immigration", etc. are all biased. The term "global labor arbitrage" itself is not widely used. I am probably going to nominate this for deletion if the article is not rewritten from Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In its current form, it is merely an anti-immigrant opinion piece. Rhobite 12:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The term is very common amongst people who are familiar with the issue. A Google search for "Global labor arbitrage" returned 9680 hits. In fact, economist Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under the Reagan Administration, often uses the term. Here's a link to one of his op-eds that makes use of the term: http://www.vdare.com/roberts/050904_marx.htm

Here's a quote from the very beginning of the op-ed:

"Libertarians and free trade economists don’t realize it, but they are pulling Marx out of his grave. Free traders are resurrecting class war, not because they are Marxists but because they confuse free trade with global labor arbitrage. Free traders turn cold shoulders to US job losses from offshore outsourcing, because they mistake the losses for the beneficial workings of comparative advantage."

The purpose of this article is to provide more information for people who are interested in understanding the concept of Global Labor Arbitrage. Admitedly it's raw and unrefined, but then again, the entry hasn't been on the Wikipedia for more than a day! Every article has to start somewhere! The subject needs to exist before people can refine and revise it! Of course, it's far from perfect, but few entries are perfect. If every new entry were held to a rigorous standard, the Wikipedia might well be empty or at least devoid of esoteric subjects. Presumably, tens of thousands of entries could be deleted under the stringent standard you've proposed.

One of the purposes of the article is to help people understand the forms that Global Labor Arbitrage can take and also to help people who are concerned about specific manifestations of this economic phenomenon make a broader connection between the other forms.

Why is a person who has lost his job or career as a result of an economic phenomenon not a victim of the phenomenon? Please explain. The term "victim" is often used outside of a criminal context. I don't see any reason why it's illegitimate to refer to it in an economic context. I'm pretty certain that i can find news articles that report on specific instances of this (since I've already read some of them in the past).

How is the term "population explosion" biased? It's a very common term that refers to a huge population increase. Are you suggesting that it is an invalid concept? And how is the term "mass immigration" biased? It refers to a huge amount of immigration as opposed to a small amount. In the case of global labor arbitrage, the concern is about mass immigration and not small amounts of immigration.

If you think you can improve upon the content of the article, please do so, but don't rip a page out of the encyclopedia merely because you disagree with the subject matter. WhipperSnapper 17:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)