RobertReich.blogspot.com<\/em>. Le point est d’autant plus remarquable que Reich, \u00e9conomiste r\u00e9put\u00e9 et ancien secr\u00e9taire au travail de l’administration Clinton, s’est toujours gard\u00e9 de recommander explicitement le protectionnisme, m\u00eame si ses choix id\u00e9ologiques et \u00e9conomiques ne le portent certainement pas vers les th\u00e8ses ultra-lib\u00e9rales. Cette attitude habituelle de Reich revient surtout, pour lui, \u00e0 prendre ses distances des courants populistes qui sont, aux USA, les avocats du protectionnisme, ou du n\u00e9o-protectionnisme, dans tous les cas, selon la terminologie d\u00e9mocrate.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tCette fois, au contraire, le ton est sans ambages; il s’agit d’une plaidoirie populiste et protectionniste. La logique du propos est droite et claire, et le court billet m\u00e9rite citation compl\u00e8te.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00abGM just announced it was laying of 21,000 more of its workers, as a means of assurring the Treasury Department the company is worthy of more bailout money. A Treasury official was quoted as saying approvingly that the goal is a slimmed-down GM.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbWhat? Having General Motors or Chrysler cut tens of thousands of jobs in order to be eligible for a government bailout reminds me of saving Vietnam by bombing it to smithereens. Aren’t we giving these companies billions of taxpayer dollars to save jobs? If not, we’re just transferring money from taxpayers to GM and Chrysler bondholders and shareholders.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbI agree with those who say the United States needs an auto industry. But there’s no point spending tens of billions of taxpayer dollars for an auto industry that’s a tiny fragment of what it was before. We could achieve that objective by doing nothing.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbBesides, as I’ve said before, the American auto industry shouldn’t be defined as auto companies whose headquarters are in the United States. The true American auto industry is Americans who make automobiles. At the rate the Big Three are shrinking even as they’re bailed out, foreign automakers with American plants may soon employ more Americans than the Big Three do. The Big Three have gone global anyway. A Pontiac G8 shipped by GM from Australia contains far less American labor than a BMW X5 assembled in the United States. General Motors’ European subsidiaries include Opel and Saab. Ford also has operations around the world. It even owns Volvo.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbThe purpose of any auto bailout ought to be to help American auto workers keep their jobs, regardless of whether they work for GM or Toyota or anyone else. Or if they lose their jobs, help them get new ones that pay almost as well. Yet we’re doing exactly the opposite: We’re paying GM and Chrysler billions of taxpayer dollars to keep them afloat while they cut tens of thousands of American jobs and slash wages. There’s no good reason why taxpayers should foot any of this bill unless the Big Three agree to keep their workers employed while they try to turn themselves around.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tC’est une sortie int\u00e9ressante, de la part d’un commentateur de ce calibre, qui prend toujours garde de ne pas se laisser emporter par les sentiments. Dans ce cas, manifestement, les sentiments parlent (et, d’ailleurs, les circonstances le justifient). Il s’agit de jugements auxquels on est conduit par les situations iniques que r\u00e9serve la crise de ce syst\u00e8me, o\u00f9 les premiers punis et les premi\u00e8res victimes sont n\u00e9cessairement les plus faibles et ceux qui n’ont aucune responsabilit\u00e9 dans la catastrophe. Tout cela est \u00e0 la mesure de frustrations diverses qu’\u00e9prouvent les uns et les autres, notamment les d\u00e9mocrates de la tendance Reich (de gauche) qui soutiennent et continuent \u00e0 soutenir Obama, tout en consid\u00e9rant que le pr\u00e9sident fait beaucoup trop de concessions aux patronat et \u00e0 Wall Street, tout en estimant, par r\u00e9alisme bien entendu, qu’il ne peut faire autrement que nombre de ces concessions, et ainsi de suite.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tC’est bien de frustration qu’il s’agit, quand l’on ne peut d\u00e9noncer les vrais coupables que l’\u00e9vidence vous d\u00e9signe pourtant, quand l’on est oblig\u00e9 de soutenir une action dont on per\u00e7oit \u00e9videmment les limites, voire la compromission. Un tel climat psychologique, dans la tension extr\u00eame de la crise, alors que l’\u00e9vidence des situations invite \u00e0 prot\u00e9ger l’\u00e9conomie bless\u00e9e, est extr\u00eamement favorable au protectionnisme, avec d’ailleurs la reconnaissance que la chose est compl\u00e8tement justifi\u00e9e malgr\u00e9 l’ukase<\/em> \u00e0 ce propos du politically correct<\/em>. La possible \u00e9volution d’un Reich et d’autres \u00e9conomistes de son parti et de son calibre, refl\u00e8te sans aucun doute un sentiment montant dans la direction am\u00e9ricaniste, dans tous les cas du c\u00f4t\u00e9 d\u00e9mocrate et du c\u00f4t\u00e9 des bureaucraties gouvernementales.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 2 mai 2009 \u00e0 15H19<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
On pourrait dire qu’il y a, \u00e0 nouveau, une s\u00e9paration entre, d’une part, le monde financier et le monde de la prospective \u00e9conomique qui va avec, les deux s’entendant pour retrouver une sorte d’humeur printani\u00e8re \u00e0 la perspective de la reprise qui s’annonce d\u00e9j\u00e0; et, d’autre part, l’\u00e9conomie r\u00e9elle, qui continue d’endurer des conditions \u00e9pouvantables… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[8299,3612,7983,6079,8300,3283,8301,2681,1097,3182,8074],"class_list":["post-70729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-accc","tag-american","tag-automobile","tag-buy","tag-chrysler","tag-general","tag-motors","tag-plan","tag-protectionnisme","tag-reich","tag-stimulus"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=70729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}