The Year Washington Became "Business Friendly"
Monday 20 December 2010
by: Robert Reich | Robert Reich's Blog | Op-Ed

(Photo: Ben Bunch; Edited: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t)
History will record 2010 as the year Washington became “business friendly.”
Not that it was all that unfriendly before. Some would say the bailouts of Wall Street, AIG, GM, and Chrysler were about as friendly as it can get. In addition, Washington gave windfalls to drug companies and health insurers in the new health bill, subsidies to energy companies in the stimulus package, and billions to domestic and military contractors.
But for corporate America it still wasn’t friendly enough. Before the midterm elections, Verizon CEO and Business Roundtable chair Ivan Seidenberg accused the President of creating a hostile environment for investment and job-creation. In the midterms, business leaders overwhelmingly threw their support to Republicans.
So the White House caved in on the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and is telling CEOs it will be on their side from now on. As the President recently told a group of CEOs, the choice “is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between America and our competitors around the world. We can win the competition.”
There’s only one problem. America’s big businesses are less and less American. They’re going abroad for sales and employees. That’s one reason they’ve showed record-breaking profits in 2010 while creating almost no American jobs.
Consider one of most popular Christmas products of all time – Apple’s iPhone. Researchers from the Asian Development Bank Institute have dissected an iPhone whose wholesale price is around $179.00 to determine where the money actually goes.
Some shows up in Apple’s profits, which are soaring.
About $61 of the $179 price goes to Japanese workers who make key iPhone components, $30 to German workers who supply other pieces, and $23 to South Korean workers who provide still others. Around $6 goes to the Chinese workers who assemble it. Most of the rest goes to workers elsewhere around the globe who make other bits.
Only about $11 of that iPhone goes to American workers, mostly researchers and designers.
Even old-tech American companies made big money abroad in 2010 – and created scads of jobs there. General Motors, for example, is now turning a nice profit and American investors bullish about its future.
Don’t miss a beat - get Truthout Daily Email Updates. Click here to sign up for free.
That doesn’t mean GM will be creating lots more blue-collar jobs in America, though. 2010 was a banner year for GM’s foreign sales — already two-thirds of its total sales, and rising. In October, GM became first automaker to sell more than 2 million cars a year in China. The company is now making more cars in China than in the United States.And GM has just signed a deal with its Chinese partner to try to crack India’s potentially huge auto market.
Meanwhile, back home in the U.S., GM has slashed its labor costs. New hires are brought in at roughly half the wages and benefits of former GM employees, under a two-tier wage structure accepted by the United Auto Workers. Almost all GM’s U.S. suppliers have also cut their payrolls.
It’s much the same even for America’s biggest retailers. 2010 wasn’t an especially good year for Wal-Mart in the United States. Its third-quarter sales fell, as U.S. shoppers continued to hold back.
But Wal-Mart International is contributing mightily to its bottom line. Its UK business, Asda, will be adding 7,500 new jobs next year. Wal-Mart is also doing well in Japan and Brazil, and hiring like mad in both countries.
So when President Obama tells American CEOs our biggest challenge comes from abroad, you’ve got to wonder. The leaders of American business are already abroad, and doing quite nicely.
Just after the midterm elections, the President’s chief economic advisor, Larry Summers, told a group of top U.S. CEOs that the election was partly a “rejection of elites…that were seen as more citizens of Davos than of their countries.” American CEOs, Summers warned, should “think very hard about their obligations as citizens of this country.”
Yes, they’re citizens. But first and foremost they’re CEOs. And CEOs have to show profits – wherever those profits come from. Under American-style capitalism, profits matter. Jobs don’t.
2010 was the year Washington became even more “business friendly.” The result has been more and better jobs – but not in America.
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
It's exciting to know that
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 11:56 — Adam (not verified)It's exciting to know that in less than 10 years, we'll all be making slave wages and grateful to make $8.50 an hour. Wish more people voted for Ron Paul instead of this crook.
I wish that everyone of a
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 14:02 — Anonymous (not verified)I wish that everyone of a progressive bent would read from R. Buckminster Fuller's visionary book 'Critical Path', the chapter 'legally piggelly' for an insightful history of the USA in the twentieth century. It's available online at www.maebrussell.com/articles,excerpts & notes/criticalpath. A good critique of 'business American style'.
The URL in the post of
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 14:56 — Garry (not verified)The URL in the post of Anonymous at 12/21/10 19:02 was not correctly typed. Here is the corrected URL:
http://www.maebrussell.com/Critical%20Path/Critical%20Path%20excerpts%201.html
This is why we must
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 15:26 — Bite (not verified)This is why we must understand, as you've intelligently pointed out, that Obama is a "genderless" politician. But that genderlessness still stands for something: for Milton Friedman and scavenger capitalism. It stands for the unadulterated profit motive which spawns Darwinian economics. So what we have in the White House, politically speaking, is actually a right wing Republican; and there's the reason Obama wants to break down the semantics between what we call a Republican and Democrat; he knows very well under what label he resides.
Republicans have ALWAYS represented the interests of the rich -- the businessmen. In common parlance, Obama is a neoliberal, pro-globalization, viciously imperialistic slut who does not even blink an eye at the mention of war to the boost our stock market. In Obama, you've got something more insidious than George W. Bush.
Ably demonstrated in this
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 16:03 — Anonymous (not verified)Ably demonstrated in this article, it should be clear to all that beginning with Reagan, US corporations (and wealth class) no longer had a skin the the game of America - they were given permission to pull up and pull out. All the while demanding a US military presence, internal law muscle, energy subsidies, and various other means of protecting their foreign generated profits, and passing the cost to the US tax payer. You think there would be more outrage and press.
I hear people say: "Why
Tue, 12/21/2010 - 22:06 — tomo (not verified)I hear people say: "Why should the rich have to pay huge taxes? It's THEIR money." Only it isn't. They stole most of it from you and me, with Obama driving the getaway car.
Obama has a beautiful smile. But Shakespeare saw him coming. Shakespeare says: "A man can smile, and smile, and be a villain." We knew Hamlet had a problem; but we didn't know we had one just as bad.
Obama is not stupid. Even his most desperate
defenders have not tried that defense. (Well, maybe Ishmael Reed is flirting with it.) Everything Reich says about "American companies" NOT being American companies is true. And if Reich knows it, Obama knows it.
When Obama pretends to believe "American companies" are working on behalf of Americans, HE IS LYING. Heart-breaking as it is to realize, he was lying all through his campaign; he genuinely wanted our votes, but he began signaling his true allegiances as soon as he began making appointments. His appointments were not made by Republican obstructionists. If anything has been HIS doing, those appointments have. And they have been uniformly of people opposed to the promises he made in his campaign. The reason so many of us have been slow to see this is that we have invested so much hope in him. The time for clear-sightedness is however long past due. I propose we begin simply to refer to him as The Fraud. I think people will know who we mean.
Garry/(19:56), Thank you for
Wed, 12/22/2010 - 02:08 — Anonymous (not verified)Garry/(19:56),
Thank you for correcting Mae's URL. If people would read what's there, they'd have a much better perspective on 'whose' money it is.
Republicans , Corporations
Wed, 12/22/2010 - 11:41 — Anonymous (not verified)Republicans , Corporations and their supporters are the ENEMY of the state of the union. the sooner people start to realize this fact the better off we will be.Ignorance is the main weapon of this rebellion.
@3:06 Thank you. This is a
Wed, 12/22/2010 - 17:46 — Bite (not verified)@3:06
Thank you. This is a great post. "The Fraud" is exceptional. I can't believe there are still democrats who support this violent, lying thug in the White House.
OK, Bite: Which Thug would
Fri, 01/14/2011 - 15:06 — Frances in California (not verified)OK, Bite: Which Thug would YOU put in the White House?