5 ms·
You can have more results for less cost, by orders of magnitude, by doing the right things. But you can't have more jobs for less cost. Cost ∝ jobs, with only s
by tlb 10y ago
You can have more results for less cost, by orders of magnitude, by doing the right things. But you can't have more jobs for less cost. Cost ∝ jobs, with only small variances for differences in pay scale and corporate profits.
- Nomentatus 10y agoThis presumes no market outside the U.S. for SpaceX's services. Of course, for the world as a whole, efficiency will not mean more jobs; excavating subway tunnels with spoons is a great way to create jobs, but not a good idea.
- justaguyonline 10y agoNew jobs are created when you create more demand by dropping prices, or build new markets for products that didn't have the opportunity to exist before because of cost. Capitalism isn't a zero sum game. For example, reduced launch costs lower the barrier for smaller customers, who in turn need cheaper satellites that do smaller tasks, thus the recent growth of the nanosat sector of the space industry and companies like Planet [1]. Or, the recently planned satellite constellations by OneWeb and SpaceX. Both of these constellations are planned to involve 1000's of individual satellites, the launch of which would of been prohibitive with higher launch prices. I would definitely say more jobs would be created in the US by cheap, global internet than the 1000 or so that might be lost by the transformation of the US launch industry.