_with dire
“about the future.

An Important Article By Tim Buck

‘How integration with U.S. wipes ae our jobs

By TIM BUCK

_ It is admitted now thai even
the federal government’s care-
fully rigged method of esti-
mating the number of men
‘and women who are unem-
‘ployed shows more than three
‘quarters of a million. More
‘and more unemployed work-
‘ers and their families are suf-
‘fering want.

From pretending to believe
‘that “this recession will be
‘very short”? a number of lead-
ing spokesmen of the monop-
‘oly-capitalist interests have
turned completely around to
trying to frighten the workers
prognostications

On March 28, the president

“and general manager of Proc-
-ter and Gamble took time off
‘from sponsoring soap operas

to. warn the annual - conven-
tion of Grocery Products
-Manufacturers of Canada
that, “the current recession

“will last as long as five

years.”
:

The fact that there is a

‘basis for his threatening fore-
‘Teast is mirrored in the ques-

tion posed by the Financial
Post recently. “Are We Head-
ed for Mortgage Trouble”

Thinking members of the cap-

italist class are beginning to
realize that three quarters of
a million men and women un-
employed is a signal of more
than “a temporary recession”.
It is a sign that the profound
structural crisis in the Cana-
dian economy is becoming
acute.

THE STRUCTURAL CRISIS

What the apologists for-cap- |

italism chose *to call a_ reces-
sion is the crisis phase of the

capitalist production cycle; the |. bx

“eyclical crisis” which is in-

separable from the capitalist |:

system everywhere. It is. be-
yond the control of the capi-
talist class.

The structural crisis which

. besets the Canadian economy,

however, is a specific Cana-

dian. problem, created in this

country by shortsighted and

‘reckless capitalist policy. It

could have been avoided.
Even now it could be over-

. come. But, it has become so
‘deepseated that its effects in-

termingle with the effects of
the cyclical: crisis. It has re-
duced the number of jobs in
Canada by hundreds of thous-
ands. It. aggravates the cycli-
eal crisis and the problem. of

unemployment now and it is

a major cause of chronic mass
unemployment. In fact, it .is
very doubtful. whether full
employment can be regaingi
in Canada, without correcting
this deformity in the economy
of our country.

That is what James Coyne,
the governor of the Bank of

Canada, was referring to
ee he told the members
and guests of the Canadian
Club in Toronto: “We are now
at one more of the critical
crossroads in our history. Per-
haps the most critical of all.”

THE CAUSE OF THE
STRUCTURAL CRISIS

The form of the structural
crisis is the deformity inflict-
ed upon the economy of this
country by the foreign mon-
opoly - capitalist interests
which dominate it. These in-
terests, predominately United
States monopolies, are devel-
oping the Canadian economy
solely to serve their own in-
terests' of Canada and their
people. They have seized con-
trol of the priceless natural
resources of our country and
are using them to supply the
industries of another country
—not as the basis of great all-
sided industrial development
in Canada.

In its relationship to the
United States they have re-
duced Canadian industry asa
whole to the role of a branch
plant economy. Little if any
research or development work
is done in their Canadian sub-
sidiaries. In the main, the de-
cisions as to what shall be
produced in Canada are made
in the United States. Their
practise is to produce in Ca-
nada replicas of what they are
producing in the US. but not

FOREIGN INVESTMENT |
in monvfacturing a

ae US. 2 Others

Percent
of total

GRAPH SHOWS sharp _in-
crease in foreign investment
in Canadian manufacturing in-
dustries from 1954 to 1958 and
the proportion coming from
the U.S.. Also shown is the
percent of total investment
which the foreign money rep-
resents. In 1954, total foreign
investment was $3.9 billion or'
47 percent of all investments.
It rose to $5.9 billion or 51 per-
cent of the total in 1958 as the
Canadian economy fell more
and more under outside dom-
Seton:

to produce all parts of. the
product in Canada.

Having the power to decide
what shall be produced,- the
United States owners make
double profit while reducing
employment in Canada by im-
posing upon their Canadian
subsidiaries an enormous vol-
ume of U.S.-made components.

An indication of the num-
ber of Canadian workers who
are displaced by this practise
alone is to be seen in the fact
that in the years 1956-57-58
the value of automobile parts

except engines. exported into’

Canada from the United
States averaged better than

$260 million per year, the |;

value of electric apparatus
and parts averaged $249 mil-
lion per year, while machin-
ery and parts (excluding farm
machinery) averaged $600 mil-
lion per year.

This average of more than
$1,100 million ‘per year in
three industries alone repre-
senting 40,000 to 50,000 jobs,
is largely a measure of how
U.S. control reduces employ-
ment in Canadian industry.

On top of this crippling ex-
ploitation. and restriction of
their self-development,. U.S.
owners restrict the freedom of
their Canadian subsidiaries to
export, thereby reducing the
possibility of developing Ca-
nada’s overseas exports and
Canadian. production to the
extent that otherwise would
be possible.

LOP-SIDED DEVELOPMENT

The claim put forward by

‘the Canadian hirelings~of the

U.S. monopolies that “U.S. in-
vestors are taking risks that
Canadian investors won’t

.| take” is completely false.

As far back. as 1954 we
pointed out that more than one
third of all the expansion of
United States ownership in
this country was being financ-
ed out of the lush profits made
on the U.S. money already in-
vested in Canada. In the. six
years that have passed since
then, the proportion has grown
so that today only about one
third of the expansion of U.S.
ownership in Canada is fin-
anced by new money from the
United States, while two
thirds is paid for out of the
fabulous profits they are mak-
ing in Canada.

During the year 1957, 69
per cent of all the expansion
of U.S.. ownership in Canada
was paid for out of profits
made in Canada by U‘S. in-
vestors. In the mining indus-
try, it was 98 per cent. They
are buying up the country
with part of the profits they
make by-exploiting its rich
natural resources and its pro-
ductive working class.

HUGH INVESTMENTS—

= Unemployment Peaks

6 0.0 ~seerncreneneemnrenrenrie

500 THOUSAND =

patina lilac a eS re

WCC GE

400 ee CH
300 Yh, yyy y
Ai
UV
45 GWU o Wj Wj WY:

GRAPH SHOWS highest unemployment total in each J
since World War II, as announced by the federal purest
statistics, Latest total of 719,000 at mid-February is hi#!
since war and tops.sharp general increase in Canada’s job
in last 17 years. Peak in 1954 was 19,000; in Korea” w
year of 1950 it was 345,000. Note how with each "recess
in the economy, unemployment has risen to.a higher is)

than the time before, and how in times of so-called

poo!

it fails to fall to previous levels. (PT Graph).

FEW JOBS

It is largely because of this
deformity inflicted upon the
Canadian economy that U.S.
exports to’ Canada have
grown at the speed they have.
The fact that such a large pro-
portion of the manufactured
products used in Canada is
imported from the United
States is reflected in. the dis-
tribution of employment in

‘Canada and changes in the

occupations of the working
class.

The executive of the Cana-
dian Labor Congress illustrates
this clearly. in its brief to the
Senate Committee on Man-
power and Employment. In its
brief the _CLC -shows - that,
from 1947 to 1959 there was
virtually no net change in em-
ployment in the industries
producing: goods in Canada,
but in the. same period there
was an increase of more than
a million in the number of
people: employed in the ser-
vice ‘industries.

In 1947 the industries pro-
ducing goods provided 2,832,-
000 jobs while the service in-
dustries provided 2.012,000.
In 1959 the industries produc-
ing goods were providing 2,-
825,000 (actually less than in
1947) while the service indus-
tries were providing 3,030.000.
In the three years 1957-58-59.
the number of jobs in the in-
dustries producing goods
shrank by 66,000 while the
number in the service indus-
tries increased by 319,000.

Now, the increase in the
number of people employed in
the service industries is a con-
sistent trend and. is to-be ex-
pected. But in the 10 years of
the enormous United States

¢
May 12, 1961—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—P™

investment boom, 1950-5% e
number of workers emp!
in the four great secton
industry — forestry, mil! off
manufacturing and trans?!
ation and communica
increased by only five i
cent. This reflects. more el
the ravages of ruthless 5?
up and automation.

It reflects the fact o
throughout this 10 yeal®
the over-all expenditures
increasing and the econo”,

a whole was being exp?

a bigger and bigger P!
tion of our manufacle
goods with high labor ©
was being exported to U5",
the United States—by oU")
masters, the new ‘U.S. 0
of the Canadian indust®
and we were trying 1
for them with raw male a
with low labor content.

of United States export
Canada and Canadian ©
to the U.S. which, in 195% att
$400 million, the aiflery
between the value had

to $1,200 million by 105%

The foregoing are 0” "f
few of the many e%@ of!
which illustrate the ma?”
which United States
of decisive sectors of
dian industry is reduci?®
number. of jobs availabe op
Canadian ‘workers. 2?
general level of Canadiat
dustrial development.
illustrate why unemp! loys oft
in Canada is so much wit
relatively, than in the
States. aif

But these example® ot
‘trate only some of thé “ft
quences of U.S. contra! te
decisive, pervading, res evel
it is to prevent the

See BUCK, ps: i