8 ms·

You can't sacrifice large swaths of the population for the so called "greater" good. Globalisation, as it stands now, is neo-colonialism. It offshores blue col

by Mikeb85 10y ago

You can't sacrifice large swaths of the population for the so called "greater" good. Globalisation, as it stands now, is neo-colonialism. It offshores blue collar jobs and concentrates white collar jobs in rich countries. It disenfranchises blue collar workers in the west, and causes brain drain in the developing world. All it's done is benefit the elite. Read progressive economists like Piketty, and combine it with visits to places like Detroit. The current model hasn't been working. I don't think Trump has all the solutions, but he diagnosed the problem better than the smug elites. Same goes for Brexit. This isn't xenophobia, working class jobs are disappearing from the west. It's a real economic phenomena. Maybe one day the world will be united, but its too soon.

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
You don't need to sacrifice them, the right wing parties that are being voted in chose to do that and are now being rewarded by the blowback.
- Mikeb85 10y ago
  Do you not remember the animosity of the GOP towards Trump? Clinton was almost unanimously favoured by Wall St. and large corporations.
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    Destroying Wall Street and making life better for working class people are two different things. I believe that he might destroy big corporations, I don't believe that will be good for the people they employ, or who have their pension invested in them. Basic left wing ideas of taxing successful and rich people and reducing inequality, supporting those who lose jobs to structural unemployment might have headed this off. I guess we'll never know.
WillPostForFood 10y ago
Software development and IT jobs that moved to India and China are blue collar? Call centers?
- Mikeb85 10y ago
  > Software development and IT jobs that moved to India and China are blue collar? Call centers? They're working class. Maybe not traditionally blue collar, but yes.
  - WillPostForFood 10y ago
    IT and software jobs are as white collar as it gets. Call centers, maybe that's a new economy blue collar.
    - gaius 10y ago
      Nope, in the UK any tech job is "blue collar", that's how the old class system still works.
      - ploika 10y ago
        I've literally never seen any evidence of that being the case.
      - umanwizard 10y ago
        Nobody is talking about the old British class system in this thread so that doesn't appear to be the relevant context.
        gaius 10y ago
        Of course it is, unless you don't think IT outsourcing is "a thing"? It is literally no different to the factory or shipyard or steel mill closing in country X and reopening in country Y.
        WillPostForFood 10y ago
        We are talking about the US election voting splits, so the British definition is interesting, but not relevant. In the US, blue collar usually means some sort of physical labor. If you are sitting at a desk, it is white collar, no matter how menial the task.
tormeh 10y ago
>All it's done is benefit the elite. It's benefitted everyone except the working class in developed countries. That's a lot of people. The great majority, actually.
- imcrs 10y ago
  But not the majority of the United States, apparently. Clinton voters are by and large an educated, distinctively non blue collar bunch.
  - XorNot 10y ago
    Clinton won the popular vote, and Donald Trumps voters were not mostly the poor: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/el...
- paulintrognon 10y ago
  It has not benefitted people outside developed country either. People are being exploited in mines of africa, in factories in asia (look at the textile industry or high tech)...
  - endisukaj 10y ago
    The alternative for most of those people is dying of famine and extreme poverty. Nobody is forcing them to work in those factories, they are doing so because that's the best alternative they will get in their countries.
    - paulintrognon 10y ago
      > The alternative for most of those people is dying of famine and extreme poverty. Nobody is forcing them to work in those factories So if I read you well, you are saying that it's either they die of hunger, either they work in those factories. That sounds a bit like a false choice, of course they are forced to work in those factories, otherwise they die! The government of China is getting billions of $ because west firms make chinese people work for almost nothing. So chinese gov. isn't going to change anything, it's going so well for them that way. So the west firm are in fact encouraging those very poor conditions of work, they are NOT improving the living of those people.
cm2187 10y ago
You could argue that globalization has pulled millions of chinese peasants out of poverty, and helped creating a middle class in China, which is already increasing the pressure on the regime to transition to a democracy. In any case, as some pointed out here, outsourcing to China is only the first step in the destruction of these jobs. Robotics is likely going to replace many of these jobs in the next 20y, which might bring back some industry into the West, ie more jobs but more sophisticated jobs.
- bambax 10y ago
  > which is already increasing the pressure on the regime to transition to a democracy Now is not the time to sing the praises of democracy.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- patrickk 10y ago
  > Robotics is likely going to replace many of these jobs in the next 20y, which might bring back some industry into the West, ie more jobs but more sophisticated jobs. US manufacturing output is trending upwards, while employment is going downwards[1]. If anything, robotics is going to eliminate many more jobs than it creates, at least in manufacturing. Look at the tech giants today- huge companies, revenue in the billions, and they employ much fewer workers to achieve that output than giant companies of past decades. This is a major driver of economic inequality, and hence populism. But a government or laws or a president cannot hold back technological progress. If anything, in 20 years, we could witness the end of capitalism as we know it because we can produce more with less employment, assuming current tech trends continue. [1] https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output-vs-jobs-1975 https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output...
  - shoover 10y ago
    > If anything, in 20 years, we could witness the end of capitalism as we know it because we can produce more with less employment, assuming current tech trends continue. I have to wonder if a capitalist like Trump can be of much help with such a transition.
threatofrain 10y ago
Globalism shuffled jobs around the world, and trade policies can change that to a modest extent -- one's trade policy can't change the fact that your citizens are too expensive versus Thailand or China. Tariffs against Mexico cannot make a Shenzhen. GM is not metaphorically coming back to Detroit. US manufacturing employment is going down, and even if / when high tech manufacturing brings production back to the US, it will be robotic production. And with every company in the world racing for machine learning, I don't see how the future looks good for a specific generation of people in history too old to newly take up a globally competitive trade. Also, it's been mentioned around here that driving is one of the most frequent jobs in most states in the US, and that Uber recently made a deliver of beer by automated truck. Uber and every relevant company in the world is trying to destroy a category of worker from everywhere in the world.
- throw_away_777 10y ago
  Tariffs can absolutely change the fact that your citizens are too expensive. You can argue that the consequences are not worth tariffs, but you can't say that they don't promote production in your country.
  - threatofrain 10y ago
    The only way for a rich nation to have metaphorical Shenzhen is if they're okay with Shenzhen-style citizens. Tariffs can't make it more attractive for Foxconn to move their factory plans to the US. I'd also say that worker discontent is one of the major sources of Trump support, but the last thing they want are the ecological reasons for making Shenzhen an attractive manufacturing capital. You need an environment where laborers cannot even fathom leaving or engaging in collective bargaining. China is okay with a scenario where much of the nation profits from the backs of abused workers because they have the might to quash malcontent. In a democracy where these abused workers have voting rights, this translates to instability. The decentralized nature of the economy also makes it so that an overly internal strategy like tariffs are insufficient. If the US stops buying from China altogether, China is still the manufacturing pit stop of the world. The rest of the world has no reason to coordinate the tariff strategy with you. Only your nation artificially sees increased prices. It's even worse if your nation ups production but nobody wants to buy it because it's too expensive. Your production isn't a power unless you export, and tariffs alone won't make you export. Manufacturing businesses want an environment where (1) citizens are dirt cheap, (2) citizens can be legitimately abused, (3) government is stable and amenable to these practices, (4) the country is connected to global supply chains so you can integrate that country as part of your production system. Also, if / when manufacturing does come back to the US, I imagine that it will bear the fruits of every company racing towards applied machine learning. It will be robotic labor that outscales cheap labor.
jazzyk 10y ago
I agree, but want to point out that it is not just blue collar jobs being off-shored. Many white-collar jobs (software development included) are being off-shored, too.
jazzyk 10y ago
I agree, but want to point out that it is not just blue collar jobs being off-shored. Many white-collar jobs (software development included) are being off-shored, too.

by Mikeb85 10y ago

ZeroGravitas 10y ago

You don't need to sacrifice them, the right wing parties that are being voted in chose to do that and are now being rewarded by the blowback.

Mikeb85 10y ago
Do you not remember the animosity of the GOP towards Trump? Clinton was almost unanimously favoured by Wall St. and large corporations.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  Destroying Wall Street and making life better for working class people are two different things. I believe that he might destroy big corporations, I don't believe that will be good for the people they employ, or who have their pension invested in them. Basic left wing ideas of taxing successful and rich people and reducing inequality, supporting those who lose jobs to structural unemployment might have headed this off. I guess we'll never know.

WillPostForFood 10y ago

Software development and IT jobs that moved to India and China are blue collar? Call centers?

Mikeb85 10y ago
> Software development and IT jobs that moved to India and China are blue collar? Call centers? They're working class. Maybe not traditionally blue collar, but yes.
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  IT and software jobs are as white collar as it gets. Call centers, maybe that's a new economy blue collar.
  - gaius 10y ago
    Nope, in the UK any tech job is "blue collar", that's how the old class system still works.
    - ploika 10y ago
      I've literally never seen any evidence of that being the case.
    - umanwizard 10y ago
      Nobody is talking about the old British class system in this thread so that doesn't appear to be the relevant context.
      - gaius 10y ago
        Of course it is, unless you don't think IT outsourcing is "a thing"? It is literally no different to the factory or shipyard or steel mill closing in country X and reopening in country Y.
        WillPostForFood 10y ago
        We are talking about the US election voting splits, so the British definition is interesting, but not relevant. In the US, blue collar usually means some sort of physical labor. If you are sitting at a desk, it is white collar, no matter how menial the task.

tormeh 10y ago

>All it's done is benefit the elite. It's benefitted everyone except the working class in developed countries. That's a lot of people. The great majority, actually.

imcrs 10y ago
But not the majority of the United States, apparently. Clinton voters are by and large an educated, distinctively non blue collar bunch.
- XorNot 10y ago
  Clinton won the popular vote, and Donald Trumps voters were not mostly the poor: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/el...
paulintrognon 10y ago
It has not benefitted people outside developed country either. People are being exploited in mines of africa, in factories in asia (look at the textile industry or high tech)...
- endisukaj 10y ago
  The alternative for most of those people is dying of famine and extreme poverty. Nobody is forcing them to work in those factories, they are doing so because that's the best alternative they will get in their countries.
  - paulintrognon 10y ago
    > The alternative for most of those people is dying of famine and extreme poverty. Nobody is forcing them to work in those factories So if I read you well, you are saying that it's either they die of hunger, either they work in those factories. That sounds a bit like a false choice, of course they are forced to work in those factories, otherwise they die! The government of China is getting billions of $ because west firms make chinese people work for almost nothing. So chinese gov. isn't going to change anything, it's going so well for them that way. So the west firm are in fact encouraging those very poor conditions of work, they are NOT improving the living of those people.

cm2187 10y ago

You could argue that globalization has pulled millions of chinese peasants out of poverty, and helped creating a middle class in China, which is already increasing the pressure on the regime to transition to a democracy. In any case, as some pointed out here, outsourcing to China is only the first step in the destruction of these jobs. Robotics is likely going to replace many of these jobs in the next 20y, which might bring back some industry into the West, ie more jobs but more sophisticated jobs.

bambax 10y ago
> which is already increasing the pressure on the regime to transition to a democracy Now is not the time to sing the praises of democracy.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
patrickk 10y ago
> Robotics is likely going to replace many of these jobs in the next 20y, which might bring back some industry into the West, ie more jobs but more sophisticated jobs. US manufacturing output is trending upwards, while employment is going downwards[1]. If anything, robotics is going to eliminate many more jobs than it creates, at least in manufacturing. Look at the tech giants today- huge companies, revenue in the billions, and they employ much fewer workers to achieve that output than giant companies of past decades. This is a major driver of economic inequality, and hence populism. But a government or laws or a president cannot hold back technological progress. If anything, in 20 years, we could witness the end of capitalism as we know it because we can produce more with less employment, assuming current tech trends continue. [1] https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output-vs-jobs-1975 https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output...
- shoover 10y ago
  > If anything, in 20 years, we could witness the end of capitalism as we know it because we can produce more with less employment, assuming current tech trends continue. I have to wonder if a capitalist like Trump can be of much help with such a transition.

threatofrain 10y ago

Globalism shuffled jobs around the world, and trade policies can change that to a modest extent -- one's trade policy can't change the fact that your citizens are too expensive versus Thailand or China. Tariffs against Mexico cannot make a Shenzhen. GM is not metaphorically coming back to Detroit. US manufacturing employment is going down, and even if / when high tech manufacturing brings production back to the US, it will be robotic production. And with every company in the world racing for machine learning, I don't see how the future looks good for a specific generation of people in history too old to newly take up a globally competitive trade. Also, it's been mentioned around here that driving is one of the most frequent jobs in most states in the US, and that Uber recently made a deliver of beer by automated truck. Uber and every relevant company in the world is trying to destroy a category of worker from everywhere in the world.

throw_away_777 10y ago
Tariffs can absolutely change the fact that your citizens are too expensive. You can argue that the consequences are not worth tariffs, but you can't say that they don't promote production in your country.
- threatofrain 10y ago
  The only way for a rich nation to have metaphorical Shenzhen is if they're okay with Shenzhen-style citizens. Tariffs can't make it more attractive for Foxconn to move their factory plans to the US. I'd also say that worker discontent is one of the major sources of Trump support, but the last thing they want are the ecological reasons for making Shenzhen an attractive manufacturing capital. You need an environment where laborers cannot even fathom leaving or engaging in collective bargaining. China is okay with a scenario where much of the nation profits from the backs of abused workers because they have the might to quash malcontent. In a democracy where these abused workers have voting rights, this translates to instability. The decentralized nature of the economy also makes it so that an overly internal strategy like tariffs are insufficient. If the US stops buying from China altogether, China is still the manufacturing pit stop of the world. The rest of the world has no reason to coordinate the tariff strategy with you. Only your nation artificially sees increased prices. It's even worse if your nation ups production but nobody wants to buy it because it's too expensive. Your production isn't a power unless you export, and tariffs alone won't make you export. Manufacturing businesses want an environment where (1) citizens are dirt cheap, (2) citizens can be legitimately abused, (3) government is stable and amenable to these practices, (4) the country is connected to global supply chains so you can integrate that country as part of your production system. Also, if / when manufacturing does come back to the US, I imagine that it will bear the fruits of every company racing towards applied machine learning. It will be robotic labor that outscales cheap labor.

jazzyk 10y ago

I agree, but want to point out that it is not just blue collar jobs being off-shored. Many white-collar jobs (software development included) are being off-shored, too.

jazzyk 10y ago

I agree, but want to point out that it is not just blue collar jobs being off-shored. Many white-collar jobs (software development included) are being off-shored, too.