3 ms·
Not really. Globalism allowed management to get rich without having to share much or any of the pie with anyone else by outsourcing and shipping manufacturing t
by xenadu02 10y ago
Not really. Globalism allowed management to get rich without having to share much or any of the pie with anyone else by outsourcing and shipping manufacturing to low-cost no-regulation jurisdictions.
Massively lower taxes reduced the redistribution effect, accelerating the accumulation of capital to the top.
A global capitalist economy can't survive 90% crushed labor, 9% upper-middle, and 1% who own almost everything. Those conditions eventually lead to revolution. Or rather it would be more accurate to say those conditions have historically led to unrest, collapse, and/or revolution.
Why would future generations feel any loyalty to their nation or this system if they're barely making ends meet while they watch billionaires cut their own taxes to make themselves richer and shift more of the burden of maintaining society on the poor and shrinking middle class?
None of this is good for the startup ecosystem. Fewer consumers with money to spend means less customers and less advertising targets. That's the problem with capital accumulating at the top: without customers there are fewer and fewer legitimate investments that have any yield so capital is forced to make increasingly reckless investments or do the equivalent of stuffing the money under a mattress. None of that is putting capital to useful work.
- nine_k 10y agoGlobalization did bring visible growth of wealth to the bottom-of-the-ladder guys like factory workers. Only it did so in places like China, Vietnam, and other manufacture outsourcing destinations.
- blisterpeanuts 10y agoBut I'm talking about software and high tech hardware that only migrated to Asian factories late in the cycle.
- anigbrowl 10y agoYeah but it's not like that's been the only growth sector in the economy, now is it?