discount canada goose harrison coat

Sérieux sexy d’une délocalisation excessive de notre industrie canadienne
Trois articles sur le phénomène de la délocalisation, le troisième article, démontrent la tendance réelle de la délocalisation, cette fois-ci Volkswagen louange les mérites de sa nouvelle usine au Tennessee, par contre sa filiale Audi a choisi le Mexique comme future usine.

Le Canada à une particularité unique, elle ne possède que deux voisins immédiats, les États-Unis et le Mexique, malheureusement cette particularité est aussi notre faiblesse.

Elle nous met dans une situation de fragilité, car notre premier voisin imprime de l’argent et le salaire médian des travailleurs est inférieur aux nôtres, ce qui veut dire que notre main-d’œuvre est trop chère.

Et notre deuxième voisin, c’est le Mexique étant un pays émergent, où les salaires et services sociaux ne se comparent même pas.

Le secteur de manufacturier canadien dans l’ensemble est sous pression constante de se faire délocaliser, et tenter de croire que l’on pourra compenser par une économie de services est encore une autre connerie de certains économistes qui ne connaissent rien en économie réelle, d’autant plus, le service est drôlement dé localisable, demander aux ex-experts en SAP qui sont au chômage ou ont été obligé de trouver un emploi moins rémunérateur, car les Indiens font très bien le travail, mais à cinq moins chers.

Donc, si on n’établit pas de nouvelles règles de réciprocité (tel que produits finis pour profits finis), notre secteur industriel ne fera pas long feu devant cette différence majeure des coûts humains.

Et ce n’est pas en exploitant des boulettes de fer, que l’on va s’en sortir, il faudra rétablir un protectionniste équilibré, non croire à une fumisterie idéologique.

Donc, nos chers politiciens qui ont cette fâcheuse tendance à faire du bruit pour faire du bruit, il serait grand temps que vous fassiez votre travail et protéger votre peuple.

Extrait de: Counterpoint: Get the auto industry moving, Ken Lewenza, Financial Post, Apr 23, 2012

Everyone knows our auto industry has experienced tremendous turmoil over the past few years. Yet the industry has survived: It’s still here, directly employing 112, 000 Canadians, and ultimately supporting 375, 000 jobs (when all the spinoffs and indirect effects are added up). Output and exports have bounced back. Canada’s share of total North American production actually grew a bit.

But the industry still faces intense challenges from international competition,

the emergence of new global producers,

and a soaring loonie

that makes Canadian workers look 25% more expensive than we actually are.

This is a good time, therefore, for Canadians to take stock of the future of this still-vital industry. Auto is still Canada’s second-most important export industry. Our communities, indeed our entire national economy, still depend on auto. The dramatic measures that all stakeholders took during the crisis — government, workers, and the companies — have paid off. But where are we headed next?

This is a critical juncture for auto, for several reasons.

From the corporate perspective, several of Canada’s important auto facilities face key investment decisions over the coming years.

We need to win those investments, to keep the industry firmly rooted here, on the cutting edge of technology and productivity.

From the government perspective, meanwhile, there is great uncertainty regarding the policy framework for auto moving forward. Government policy was essential in defending the sector through the meltdown. And the economic evidence shows discount canada goose harrison coat was a good investment — for Canadian taxpayers, not just the auto industry.

But will government continue to be an active player at the table?

At the federal level, we don’t know how committed the government is to the very idea of active industrial policy for the auto industry or other important high-tech sectors.

In Ontario, meanwhile, government is grappling with a big deficit. So there are question marks at both levels.

If governments step back from playing a proactive, powerful role in building Canada’s auto manufacturing footprint, then the future of the sector is not bright.

A look around the world indicates that jurisdictions with active auto strategies are the ones where employment and exports have remained vibrant despite global economic uncertainty, changing technology, and environmental constraints. Countries like Germany, Korea, Japan, Brazil, and of course China are building and expanding their industries. In none of those cases does the strategy rely on cutting labour costs, trying to win a race to the bottom (indeed, in several of those countries, labour costs are higher than Canada).

Canada is one of the only auto-producing jurisdictions in the world without a clear national auto strategy. This is an important structural weakness that will hurt discount canada goose harrison coat badly in our efforts to cement future investments.

Even the U. S., which preaches free-market capitalismis using every policy trick in the book these days to support auto and other high-tech industries. Investment subsidies. Technology support. Trade interventions. Domestic content rules.

How ironic that the cutting-edge efforts of an innovative Canadian firm, Magna International, to develop and produce electric vehicle technology are occurring mostly in U. S. facilities (like a new $40-million facility just opened in Grand Blanc, Mich. ). Why?

Because the U. S. Department of Energy offered enormous investments for clean car technology … but only if the discount canada goose harrison coat is done in America.

Il faut arrêter de croire que tout le monde est gentil et tout le monde est beau et tout le monde va jouer selon de sainte règle, ding, ding, revenez dans le monde réel, si vous aviez été entrepreneur, ça fait longtemps que vous auriez compris cela.

Last week, the CAW released a major policy document, titled Rethinking Canada’s Auto Industry. We surveyed best practices from the policies of 16 auto-producing jurisdictions around the world. And we propose a 10-point strategy to ensure Canada retains a vibrant, productive, profitable industry for decades to come — one that once again can generate good jobs for our children and our communities, as is occurring in other countries today.

Market-worshiping commentators have criticized our approach as interventionist, nostalgic, or (gasp) “protectionist. ” In fact, every one of our proposals has been enacted successfully in at least one auto-producing jurisdiction today.

Both real-world experience, and our own national economic history, prove that without targeted, powerful measures to expand the domestic footprint in desirable sectors like auto, we’ll be left in the dust by other countries who are already doing exactly that.

Governments must embrace the idea of active, sector-focused policymaking for this industry (and any other sector that similarly generates disproportionate investment, productivity and exports). The default policy stance for those who reject the whole philosophy of industrial policy is to continue to put all our national economic eggs in the basket of extracting and exporting raw resources (especially bitumen). That’s dangerous and unsustainable; Canada needs and deserves more.

Il parle de Harper bien sûr, qui couche avec l’industrie pétrolifère et Bay Street,
pour Charest c’est un cas purement pathétique.

Extrait de: