4 ms·

It might be desirable in the short-term, but as an expanding middle class and the one-child policy begin to shrink the population (and that is a very good thing

by drinian 17y ago

It might be desirable in the short-term, but as an expanding middle class and the one-child policy begin to shrink the population (and that is a very good thing, the world can't support a billion Chinese forever), then China's going to have to learn how to solve its problems with methods that don't involve throwing people at them. Not to mention that the West is probably going to end up paying for this, when the currency floats and suddenly all those factories in China are making $600 iPods instead of $300 ones. Also, let's take your parking example. Putting aside the Chinese disregard for all road signs and instructions, let's imagine that they install coin-op parking meters. (Yes, I know, with the coin shortage in China this isn't realistic, etc. etc.). Your uncle now has the much easier job of cleaning out the meters, rather than running around all day. And maybe someone gets a skilled-labor job as a parking meter repairman?

BrentRitterbeck 17y ago
Oh no! A useless iPod will now cost twice as much because Apple can no longer exploit an entire nation! I think that's a step in the right direction.
billswift 17y ago
>Your uncle now has the much easier job of cleaning out the meters, rather than running around all day. And maybe someone gets a skilled-labor job as a parking meter repairman? But there are fewer jobs available in this situation in aggregate. This is a problem with several criticisms of automation that I have seen in liberal and libertarian circles - they claim that automation does not decrease the number of workers since workers are needed to deal with the automation. Apparently they are totally innumerate, since while new jobs are created servicing the automation, the total number of jobs is significantly reduced.
- drinian 17y ago
  True. I suppose that I would consider it a good thing, taking as a given that 1) a smaller global population is important in the long run, and 2) eventually we will find a way to allow most people to live without having to work 40 hours a week.
  - billswift 17y ago
    The benefit is that the people freed up can do other things, can contribute to the economy in other ways.

by drinian 17y ago

BrentRitterbeck 17y ago

Oh no! A useless iPod will now cost twice as much because Apple can no longer exploit an entire nation! I think that's a step in the right direction.

billswift 17y ago

>Your uncle now has the much easier job of cleaning out the meters, rather than running around all day. And maybe someone gets a skilled-labor job as a parking meter repairman? But there are fewer jobs available in this situation in aggregate. This is a problem with several criticisms of automation that I have seen in liberal and libertarian circles - they claim that automation does not decrease the number of workers since workers are needed to deal with the automation. Apparently they are totally innumerate, since while new jobs are created servicing the automation, the total number of jobs is significantly reduced.

drinian 17y ago
True. I suppose that I would consider it a good thing, taking as a given that 1) a smaller global population is important in the long run, and 2) eventually we will find a way to allow most people to live without having to work 40 hours a week.
- billswift 17y ago
  The benefit is that the people freed up can do other things, can contribute to the economy in other ways.