Writers in magazines devoted to economics are giving the matter their attention. In the March number of Guntons Cmagazme appears the following: "There is no countrywhose economic changes are likely to create so much industrial surprise. if not dislocation. in the next quarter of a century as Japan. Until recently Japan has been classed withChina and other Asiatic countries as in the handabor area. The more advanced machineusing countries. like England and the United States. have entertained no fears from competition with the cheap labor of Asia. because the economies of their superior machinery have more than offset the increase in the cost of production through their higher wages. This has led many economists of the laissezfaire school to assume that high wages instantaneously bring with them lower cost of production. attributing the diminished cost to the increased skill and dexterity of the higher wage laborers. Such writers as Edward Atkinson and Mr. Shoenhof are constantly adding to the flood -of freetrade literature on the basis of this very erroneous assumption. Because we could copinetc successfully in most lines of manufacture with Asiatic countries. it has been insisted that we could do so witi England for the same reason. namely. that our wages were higher. "Huaving assumed that the superiority of high wage conditions all lies in the increased persoiial dexterity of the laborors. these writers seem to have entirely overlooked the great hart machinery plays in lowprice machine phenomena. The reason this country is in greater danger from English competition than from the Chinese is that England has similar machinery to our own. while the Chinese continue to produce by hand labor. Whenever two countries employ the same tools or machinery. the lower wages become the great element in determining the competition.
Identified stereotypes
Asiatic countries are in the hand-labor area.