|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
I have also noticed this. Since the bailout of the big 3 US automakers, every GM/Daewoo facility that was located in the city is now a Chevy.
I am not sure why either, but I have seen young Korean guys driving Korean models who have glued on Chevy emblems to their cars~
I cant help but laugh about that..kind of the same laugh I have when I see rich ajussis impressing each other with Budweiser. |
Daewoo has been re-branded as Chevrolet. GM owns Daewoo. It has nothing to do with the bailout.
I know some people who don't know much about cars think they are imported, but those who are buying them aren't paying import car prices. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
The nature of trade is that of course some industries will be hurt by imports, while others will be strengthened by the increased exports. There is not a single country in the world that trades and does not suffer at least some type of loss in one sector. The gains however are to the overall welfare of the nation (consumers) are at least supposed to be larger than the losses in various other sectors.
In the case of Korea however, I do not see huge losses to the Korean farmer. Korea already produces rice at a surplus level, so much to a point that I believe it was last year the government had rice rotting in storage because so much more was produced that even after domestic consumption, exports, and food aid to the north...there was STILL to much. However the Korean government was very adamant about not including rice in this deal.
But on to the Korean cattle farmer, although it is good for consumers, I cannot imagine huge losses to the Korean farmers in the beef market. Korean beef is already 300-400% more expensive than imported, and yet Koreans happily and readily choose it over imports. The beef industry here has done a fantastic job over the years to convince Koreans that Korean beef tastes better, better for your body, one of a kind most delicious beef in the world, and all the other psychological factors that drive costumers to choose it over imports. As mentioned earlier it will take 15 years for US beef tariff reductions to be completed, and even after the 40% tariff is reduced, it is not as if consumers on the end will ever see that beef 40% cheaper. |
What keeps the price of Korean rice so high is there is oversupply? Just the belief that it is somehow better? |
I have wondered this myself, and while I have no figures to back it up, it is my belief that the price seem high because of the subsidies Korea farmers get from the government. Trade figures and economics graphs are great at measuring raw data, hard numbers...but they cannot measure things like national sentiment. It seems illogical that a staple food that is plentiful, is eaten 3 times a day by an entire nation of people costs as much as it does.
So I believe the government (and people) are very willing to pay higher prices (either by subsidizing farm production, restricting urban development to preserve farm land, or consumers who pay higher prices) for their own goods because Korea is a country rapidly changing, and while most are eager to jump on the globalization train, there is still a small part of the heart of many Korean people that want to preserve their history and agrarian culture by keeping Korean farmers producing and in business, even at the cost of higher prices. |
Food is a national security issue so I can understand them insuring that enough farms stay afloat. But it is strange to be giving Korean rice away while restaurants serve imported rice because they can't afford the homegrown product. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coralreefer_1
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I dont recall saying the difference was related to the bailout..only that since around that time, all of the former GM/Daewoo locations have changed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
| I dont recall saying the difference was related to the bailout..only that since around that time, all of the former GM/Daewoo locations have changed. |
By using the bailout as your time reference, you're implying there's some connection, whether you meant to or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coralreefer_1
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
| I dont recall saying the difference was related to the bailout..only that since around that time, all of the former GM/Daewoo locations have changed. |
By using the bailout as your time reference, you're implying there's some connection, whether you meant to or not. |
Well I do not want to get into an in-depth argument about it...however as you state Gm owns Daewoo...and as part of GM's bailout package they were ordered to put forth a restructuring plan to change the way they were run, dump toxic debts and assets...etc. I have not, nor will I do the research to verify, but it well may be that re-branding themselves in Korea as Chevy rather than GM/Daewoo was part of that restructuring plan or otherwise measures taken to increase sales...regardless of whether it was forced on them by the government or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chevy has the ugliest car badge out of all cars I have seen. Bar none. Looks like a giant Christian Cross plastered on the front of the car but the wrong colour. ugly |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| liveinkorea316 wrote: |
| Chevy has the ugliest car badge out of all cars I have seen. Bar none. Looks like a giant Christian Cross plastered on the front of the car but the wrong colour. ugly |
It's a bow-tie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| coralreefer_1 wrote: |
| I dont recall saying the difference was related to the bailout..only that since around that time, all of the former GM/Daewoo locations have changed. |
By using the bailout as your time reference, you're implying there's some connection, whether you meant to or not. |
Well I do not want to get into an in-depth argument about it...however as you state Gm owns Daewoo...and as part of GM's bailout package they were ordered to put forth a restructuring plan to change the way they were run, dump toxic debts and assets...etc. I have not, nor will I do the research to verify, but it well may be that re-branding themselves in Korea as Chevy rather than GM/Daewoo was part of that restructuring plan or otherwise measures taken to increase sales...regardless of whether it was forced on them by the government or not. |
Maybe, I don't want to research it either. But could it be that when they finally got 100% of Daewoo, they made the decision to switch over? Probably make it easier to sell them in other Asian markets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2011 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tideout wrote: |
| akcrono wrote: |
| highstreet wrote: |
Can you really call them greedy?
If a business owner marks up his imported products and people still buy them, is that really greed? |
Yes. Greed is an unhealthy desire for wealth and property. Has nothing to do with demand. |
Yeah, gotta agree. This is what greed looks like. |
Supply and demand will fix these except for when the government interferes with ridiculous duties. Will force competition into the system. Koreans will have to lower prices and improve production to survive. There are always winners and loser within each country. Technology will be a huge boost for Korean exports to the US. Food will prob not be so good for Korean farmers but good for consumers. (However, I think rice was exempted so Farmers may not suffer too much. But this small plot of land thing is terribly inefficient.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michi gnome
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Location: Dokdo
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
These "free" trade agreements are designed for big business to exploit cheap labor, and to get around environmental laws. A few peripheral jobs might be created, but others will be lost. The jobs created will undoubtedly be low to average pay, & minimal to no benefits. The days of good salary & benefits seems to be a thing of the past.
Car exports from U.S. to Korea are increased, which upon first glance seems as though this will create more jobs in the U.S. Why do I foresee a Ford manufacturing plant in China (if there is not one already, I don't know) taking care of this? They just stack the finished cars on a barge & ship right across the West Sea to Korea. America is not needed.
It will be interesting to see what kind of effects this agreement will have on the Education industry. It's no secret big money in the U.S. is moving towards privatization with Charter schools. I've read that Wall Street has eventual plans to trade on Charter schools. Not sure how this would work, but education is a multi-billion dollar taxpayer funded industry, & you can be sure Wall Street has been figuring out how to get their hands on that money. The test designing industry itself rakes in a few billion. Maybe they will see an opportunity to create franchise chain-schools in Korea. Hell, you could even combine them with KFC or McDonalds--the kids will love that. "Hi, I'm a teacher at Burger King English School".
Under a more corporate, business model of education in the U.S. there are plans to have "scripted" classes, where teachers are not allowed to deviate from scripted lesson plans, designed by some corporate "education business professional." Personal creativity, an individual teaching style & manner of relating to students will be further frowned upon.
Eventually they will probably just replace teachers with computers & online learning. This might sound like fantasy, but it is not just low-skill jobs than are being offshored--take a look at the tech industry. Any skilled job has tasks that can be broken into segments and mechanized, and offshored to a country where some shmuck can do the same tasks for much cheaper than a Western worker. Not entirely unrealistic. I am sure a corporate-funded study will be done somewhere to support the mindset that "teachers are inefficient, too expensive, many of them are bad & belong to unions, etc, and a computer program can do a much better job." Then it is only a matter of getting people to accept it--a blitzkrieg media propaganda campaign to convince the public that your kids receive a better education from a computer "teacher".
Korea and Japan are currently leading the way in creating robot teachers, as far as I know.
Hagwon teachers--don't be surprised when you are replaced by a robot who speaks better English than you, has no classroom management difficulties, doesn't need an apartment, & never complains!
Welcome to the New World Order. We must transition to robot teachers in order to remain competitive and "win the future!!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
