new internationalist
issue 246 - August 1993
Globaloney
The business pages are larded with language whose meaning
is obscure and often
misleading. Doug Smith explores the jargon of the corporate world.
Level playing field
In
theory
The argument for a 'level playing field' sounds like an argument for simple
justice. International trade is a game played on a sports field. If the field
slopes in one direction, one team has an unfair advantage. The field is thought
to be tilted, for example, by a state that provides a subsidy to an industry,
allowing it to reduce the price of its exports. Since states can't change
ends every quarter the solution is to do away with these subsidies.
In practice
'Subsidies' are very broadly defined to include things like regional development
programmes, generous unemployment insurance benefits and even publicly-funded
health care. Trading partners can argue that because these benefits are provided
by the state, employers receive a hidden subsidy. To level the field these
programmes must be bulldozed.
Money markets
In theory
During the 1980s advances in telecommunications coupled with extensive deregulation
created a seamless international web through which money flows at the touch
of a computer key. This high-tech global finance system allows investors instant
access to the best investments. An unregulated marketplace allows each nation
to develop its competitive advantage and provides the Third World with the
investment it needs to develop.
In practice
By some estimates nearly a trillion dollars now changes hands every day on
the foreign-exchange markets. The hands remain the same but they control more
and more of the world's resources. The globalized market is highly volatile;
national governments have lost much of their ability to control it. Unable
to meet social demands they become prey to disorder as people look to their
ethnic, religious or regional group for the protection the state once provided.
In this sense globalized money markets contribute more to global fracturing
than to integration.
Downsizing
In
theory
In the weight-conscious West employers speak of shedding well-paid unionized
jobs the way dieters speak of losing unwanted pounds. By 'downsizing' (making
production 'leaner' and 'more efficient') companies are supposed to be getting
smarter. They use the latest technologies to keep their inventory as low as
possible and increasingly depend on outside suppliers. Sometimes this is referred
to as a 'creative web of corporations'.
In practice
Downsizing is simply another word for capitalism's drive to reduce labour
costs. Computer inventories make worker layoffs and recalls more frequent.
Companies now recall people on a temporary basis rather than lay them off
on a temporary basis. Whether in Singapore or Silicon Valley, the web is repressive
and low-paying, not creative. 'Downsizing' is an admission that economic growth
and high unemployment can exist at the same time.
Total quality management
In
theory
This is a management approach championed by Western business consultants who
see it is as the secret behind Japan's economic success - a shift away from
scientific management ('Taylorism') which treated workers as mere automatons.
Under TQM workers are treated as partners who are committed to the firm's
quality. They are promised more autonomy and more variety in their work.
In practice
TQM and the variety of other names that it parades under - such as 'Quality
of Working Life' - is designed not to enhance workplace democracy but to increase
productivity and erode or eliminate unions. According to Japanese trade unionist
Tsuzuku Ken, TQM has helped to pit workers against one another and ostracize
dissidents. At Toshiba, he says: 'Workers are encouraged to inform against
each other, and thus the entire workforce succumbs to the despotic rule of
managerial authority.'
Structural adjustment programmes
In theory
Commonly called 'SAPs', these programmes imply working together with Third
World countries to create economic structures which will help them regain
control over their own communities. There may be 'structural' problems with
their national economies now, but once they are 'adjusted' things will be
a lot better.
In practice
Structural adjustment is neo-colonial rule imposed by international banks
on behalf of Western and Japanese corporations. The plans demand reduced government
services, lower taxes on high income earners, privatization of state-owned
industries, increased agricultural exports and lower tariffs on imports. International
Money Fund loans are withheld if a country does not accept the terms of these
plans.
Deregulation
In
theory
The movement to reduce government regulation hit full stride under Ronald
Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Reagan's treasury secretary William Simon claimed
that 'regulation has slowly strangled key sectors of our economy'. Freed of
Government red tape, industry was supposed to unleash a competitive frenzy
of innovative high-quality goods.
In practice
We have seen the Exxon Valdez and the (appropriately named) Spirit of Free
Enterprise disasters - there is no letup in the toll that industrial disease
and accidents take every year. Deregulation of the airline industry led to
an initial reduction in prices, but now the industry is in near-permanent
crisis. Some airlines are so weighed down with debt that they have had to
cut wages, lay off staff and scrimp on safety to stay aloft. In other cases
airlines have gained near complete control of certain routes and can literally
charge what the traffic will bear.
Deficit reduction
In theory
The Third World has SAPs, the West has 'deficit reduction'. Editorial cartoonists
traditionally depict the national deficit as a malevolent octopus, threatening
to crush taxpayers so impoverished that they have been reduced to wearing
barrels. Because of the spendthrift ways of past liberal governments, we are
told, all governments must decrease their levels of social spending.
In practice
The deficits of most Western governments are the legacy of punitive interest-rate
policies rather than government spending. Interest rates are hiked to dampen
demand and lower inflation. As a result currency values fall and overall debt
payments increase. Cutting back government spending rarely does much to decrease
the deficit since it weakens consumer confidence and increases demand for
social services. Cutting government spending also creates a 'social deficit'
as it reduces educational, social and health services; and an 'infrastructure
deficit' as highways, schools and airports crumble.

