Core-Periphery Justice

Dear WSNers: Elson wrote:

"But more important, there is the yet undiscussed issue of what violence or
peaceful means are use for.  To seize state power?  Or to disarm an existing
repressive regime
and implement a non-repressive regime?  Should a state policy be to 
nationalize
industries, or force private enterprises to work with unions?  Will either 
of
these
really work when companies can simply pick up and leave for another state?"

Elson hits the key problem on the head as far as regulating global 
capitalism.
We certainly need a just strategy for regulating economic relations between 
core
and periphery. I would also add the requirement that it doesn't destroy
efficient markets or democracy. This is easier said than done, however, 
since it
isn't always clear what counts as justice. Can we really expect companies 
to pay
a relatively untrained 3rd world worker in a country with little 
infrastructure
the same as a Western, highly trained and unionized worker in a country with
lots of infrastructure? When is it ok to shift business from one sector to
another? Capitalists simply pay as low a rate as possible for overall costs.
That is why there are still highly paid auto workers in Michigan. They are
highly trained and the infrastructure is already there. Let's say that GM 
wants
to start a factory in Mexico. In fact, let's assume a fair-minded GM exec 
for
the sake of argument to show the difficulty involved. She's heard that N.
American compa
nies have underpaid their Mexican workers in the past, and she wants to be 
fair
but profitable. How much should she pay her workers? How about the going 
rate
for labor? But that is less than the N. American counterpart makes for the 
same
effort. That isn't fair. So let's equalize the pay. Why should she open a
factory there now? THe infrastructure cost is much higher, and there is more
training to do. Going this way, the Mexican worker stays poor. If, on the 
other
hand, she can find a way to make a greater profit in Mexico, then she can 
build
her factory there. But where does the profit come from? She could try to
pressure the Mexican gov't to put up some infrastructure money. Or she 
could get
the workers to work for less than the North Anmerican counterpart. Maybe 
even
get a subsidy from a N. American gov't. But that will anger N. American 
workers.

The upshot is that calculating what is just in international business isn't
easy. Especially when we don't want to undermine the effectiveness of 
markets
too much. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it is harder than some 
think, and
as has been said many times in the wp discussion, will require some creative
thinking. The most popular theory of distributive justice, that of John 
Rawls,
recommends that any gain in the upper class never be bought at the cost of 
the
pay of a member of a lower class (that is a _very_ rough statement of his
view).Implementing the theory is difficult. Which lower class? NAmericas?
Mexicos? Indias? Then there is getting the N. (or S!)American worker to care
about the poor in India. Good luck with that one.

Anyone care to propose a theory (or even a general practice) that will 
govern
the behavior of global companies? Focusing on the justice of N.American 
workers
versus periphery workers, what is a just framework?

Randy Groves