Looking At The Status Quo Of Chinese Traditional Manufacturing From Sweatshops

Adidas, the famous Olympic sponsor, "three bars" is trapped.

The investigation by the Olympic Organizing Committee has attracted a lot of public outcry, but it has also brought a lot of inspiration to China's economy, that is, the road of "smithy economic growth" mode has not worked.

2012

The Olympic Games are about to start, and the discordant voice is coming at the moment: Olympic sponsors Adidas is in the "sweatshop gate" and has been investigated by the Olympic Organizing Committee.

Obviously, behind the athletes' active preparations for fighting on the stage, the sponsors on the stage also uphold and carry forward the "better, more daring and darker" way of earning, with the Olympic spirit of "faster, higher and stronger".

But this is not the case.

From Bangladesh to Kampuchea, Adidas was not the first to be "sweatshop door".

In my view, the revelation of ADI gate to China's economic and social development deserves more attention.

Since 2008

Since then, the European and American economies have been sluggish, and China's GDP has jumped to the "world second", and its economic status has been repeatedly exaggerated by foreign media.

But China's policymakers should be very clear about the role of real estate and demographic dividends in the surge of their economy.

In fact, such an unsustainable mode of economic growth has sounded the alarm: the data released recently showed that China's GDP recorded only 7.6% growth in the two quarter, approaching 7.5% of the warning level.

And Adidas's investigation by the Olympic Organizing Committee for "sweatshop doors" once again sounded the alarm bell in China.

Simple analysis, ADI's "sweatshop door" actually exposes two important information: first, the labor-intensive growth mode that relies on demographic dividend to get excess profits is not widely recognized by the world; two, with the opening up of Southeast Asia and other countries, the hat of China's "world factory" may not be guaranteed, and the risk of large-scale foreign investment escaping is also increasing.

From the words "sweatshops", we can see that the OCOG's contempt for Adidas is magnified, and that is to say that it is excessive to rely on the demographic dividend to get excess profit.

Looking back at every round of economic growth in Europe and the United States, we rely on Technological Development and institutional innovation. Labor intensive subtext is actually a relative lack of scientific and technological innovation. Today, in the globalization of trade, we are still snatching the jobs of other countries, and it is hard for us to get enough respect from the world.

Moreover, the operation mode of labour intensive economies can easily widen the gap between the rich and the poor, thereby generating all kinds of social contradictions, nor is it respected by the universal values of the West.

So we can see that although Chinese workers provide cheap consumer goods for many countries with industrious hands, "made in China" is still like a cheap label, and even some politicians have repeatedly played the role.

China can, of course, ignore the strange vision of the outside world and remain immersed in the joy of being a "world factory", but the problem is that with the gradual opening up of countries such as Southeast Asia, the hat of China's "world factory" may not be guaranteed, and the risk of large-scale foreign investment escaping will increase with every day, exacerbating China's economic downside risks.

Take this Adidas "sweatshop door" as an example.

It is understood that Adidas has produced Kampuchea's Olympic Games licensed goods in Hong Kong.

Factory workers pay only 10 pounds a week (less than 100 yuan).

These workers, such as ADI, can get $130 a month, so that the monthly salary is only about 1000 yuan.

Obviously, the traditional labor cost advantage of China has ceased to exist, and with the gradual opening up of countries such as Southeast Asia, this trend will become more obvious.

Since announcing the overall strategy of "returning to the Asia Pacific", the United States has begun to accelerate its layout and penetration in Southeast Asian countries.

Recently, US Secretary of state Hilary visited France, Afghanistan, Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam, Laos, Kampuchea, Egypt and Israel in 9 countries.

Obviously, visits to Vietnam, Laos, Kampuchea and other countries, as well as the previous ice breaking tour in Burma, have highlighted that they are looking for countries that can replace China's role in Southeast Asia in order to reduce their dependence on China in the process of "re industrialization".

As we all know, in the global division of labor, China is usually at the low end of the industrial chain and earning meager profits. It is only by relying on population advantages that it can create huge global dividends.

Unfortunately, it is not difficult to predict from ADI "sweatshop door" that in the process of "re industrialization" in European and American countries in the future, it is impossible for China to continue the "Smith type economic growth" mode, which requires China to accelerate the adjustment of the economic structure, grasp the opportunity in the new global division of labor, and pave the way for the next "Chinese miracle".