¨and some economists suggest that China’s manufacturing workforce may be 20 million workers larger than the official total.¨ (1)
Jim Willie: ¨(…) in 1999 the Clinton Admin granted Most Favored Nation status to China that took many observers off guard. With it came the immediate promise of significant direct foreign investment. On the one side, the low cost solution was pitched to the American public. It seemed like a much bigger systemically large NAFTA destructive grenade. Nobody discussed the down side, not of the certain risk. The USEconomy would most assuredly lose legitimate wealth engines, and become hopelessly dependent upon both asset bubbles and debt to a much greater extent.¨ (2)
¨Nowhere has the betrayal of the US nation been more stark and ugly as with the granting of Most Favored Nation status to China in 1999. The story told is shallow and insipid, if not deceptive and loaded with treason. Reducing the cost of import items is a very shallow empty argument, with no long-term benefit, since legitimate income from industry was exported out of the United States.¨ (3)
China’s Manufacturing Workforce Soars, as China Breaks New Ground
September 6, 2014
China’s manufacturing labor force surged to approximately 105 million workers in 2012, a level so extraordinary that it is seven times larger than that of the United States, the nation with the world’s second largest manufacturing workforce.
This growth in manufacturing labor force is not because China set out to build the biggest manufacturing labor force as a thing in itself, but as an outcome of China’s determination to industrialize itself, and other nations, as part of a mission to transform itself, and the world to a higher level.
To put this into perspective, the table below shows that between 2002 and 2012, China’s workforce that performs manufacturing grew from 85.9 million to 105.9 million, an astounding growth of 20 million manufacturing workers in 10 years. The figures for China’s manufacturing workforce are not exact, and some economists suggest that China’s manufacturing workforce may be 20 million workers larger than the official total.
Size of Manufacturing Workforce (in millions of workers)
United States: 17.2
United States: 14.7
Simultaneously, under the imperial London-Wall Street policy, Western nations have closed down factories, or shipped work overseas, a combined policy that in Japan is referred to as the “hollowing out” of the manufacturing base. The combined manufacturing workforce total of the United States, Japan, and Germany, was 37.7 million in 2002, but over the next 10 years, these three countries axed 4.8 million workers. By 2012, China’s manufacturing workforce of 105.9 million was three times that of the combined manufacturing workforce of the United States, Japan, and Germany of 32.9 million.
The financial oligarchists have denounced the Chinese manufacturing worker as less productive than such a worker in the West. This is still true in some sectors, but is changing. The Chinese economy is the economy that built Three Gorges dam, the world’s longest high-speed rail network, the South-to-North water diversion project, is actively involved in space activity, and so forth. Lyndon LaRouche has noted that the same worker’s work, situated in a more productive economy, becomes more productive. And China’s 105 million manufacturing workers—and growing—embedded in the creative, upshifting Chinese economy, become more productive and powerful. (emphasis & graphs added by CNLib)
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article and videos are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of CanadaNewsLibre. The contents of this article and videos are of sole responsibility of the author(s). CanadaNewsLibre will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements. The CNL grants permission to cross-post original CanadaNewsLibre articles and videos on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. canadanewslibre.com may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
ↄ⃝ Copyleft CanadaNewsLibre 2014