Display:
I suspect that the question of legacy costs depends to a large extent on the degree to which the state underwrites the costs of retirement and medical benefits.  If your competitors have only to pay labor costs for those currently working and you have to pay for everyone who ever retired and is still living, you will be at a significant disadvantage.  Same for medical care of retirees.  If your labor costs are 18% and your competition's are 10%, you are still at a disadvantage.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Thu Dec 4th, 2008 at 10:03:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But only if you create more than your share of retirees and medical cases... Universal health care might be cheaper for them overall, because universal health care is much more efficient than having an insurance industry middleman to take a largish cut. But the money comes from somewhere - and I hardly think European or Japanese companies, automobile industry or otherwise, share a smaller fraction of their earnings with society than American ones.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Dec 5th, 2008 at 10:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series