3 ms·

What's the point of making things cheaper when it centers the wealth on just a few owners? When there are lots of workers working low income jobs versus just a

What's the point of making things cheaper when it centers the wealth on just a few owners? When there are lots of workers working low income jobs versus just a few workers working high income jobs, it creates a healthier more distributed economy.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
closeparen 9y ago
The point is that it delivers real, tangible quality-of-life factors, which typically matter more to someone's well-being than his feelings about aggregate wealth inequality. I could stick it to the rich bastards who own energy stocks, but I'd rather be warm in the winter and cool in the summer.
tomhoward 9y ago
An estimated 2.3 Billion people now own smartphones. That number is growing at about 10% per year. All those people have access to the sum of all human knowledge and the ability to educate themselves almost as well as (some would argue even better than) the students of the most expensive universities. They can communicate with anyone else at almost zero marginal cost, and can sell products and services to basically anyone else on the planet. All because things keep getting cheaper. That's the point of making things cheaper. Sure, a consequence of that is that the founders and executives and financiers of Google, Samsung, Apple etc are wildly rich. And that means they can (and do) invest in new products and services to keep improving peoples' standard of living, as well as funding benevolent projects. It's pretty amazing if you ask me.
- dorian-graph 9y ago
  > All those people have access to the sum of all human knowledge and the ability to educate themselves almost as well (some would argue even better) than students of the most expensive universities. They can communicate with anyone at almost no marginal cost, and can sell products and services to basically anyone else on the planet. Is this even happening though?
  - tomhoward 9y ago
    Out of Coursera's 18 million registered learners, 1.3 million are from India with top registered learners hailing from Bengaluru, Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad, the website said today. Driven by the vast interest coming from Bengaluru, technology hub, nearly half of enrollments in the country are in technology courses such as computer science (25 per cent) and data science (18 per cent). - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/education/bengaluru-tops-online-learning-in-india-coursera/articleshow/52078732.cms http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/educat... Top Freelancing countries on Elance: India $312,865,112/649,566 freelancers United States $310,023,579/1,123,935 freelancers Ukraine $72,429,514/29,341 freelancers Pakistan $71,061,107/176,011 freelancers United Kingdom $35,320,646/126,670 freelancers Canada $31,379,228/85,639 freelancers Romania $28,062,831/44,305 freelancers Russia $27,416,743/21,045 freelancers Philippines $18,261,489/178,725 freelancers Argentina $17,796,295 China $17,518,704/28,752 freelancers Serbia $13,600,638/18,577 freelancers Bangladesh $11,092,326/66,970 freelancers https://www.elance.com/trends/talent-available/geo#GeoRanking https://www.elance.com/trends/talent-available/geo#GeoRankin...
    - nashashmi 9y ago
      And when you try net income per person, you get: Ukraine $2,468.54 Russia $1,302.77 Serbia $732.12 Romania $633.40 China $609.30
      - tomhoward 9y ago
        Thanks, I'm capable of using a calculator :D There will naturally be a distribution of incomes among those people, with some people earning little or nothing, and some people earning a lot. The point is that whatever the income a given person is earning, that is income that was unavailable to them before modern computing and communications devices became affordable to them. That's money that people are using to build better lives for themselves, their families and their communities. As I said, that is the point of making things cheaper.
alasdair_ 9y ago
If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.
alasdair_ 9y ago
If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.
alasdair_ 9y ago
If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

closeparen 9y ago

The point is that it delivers real, tangible quality-of-life factors, which typically matter more to someone's well-being than his feelings about aggregate wealth inequality. I could stick it to the rich bastards who own energy stocks, but I'd rather be warm in the winter and cool in the summer.

tomhoward 9y ago

An estimated 2.3 Billion people now own smartphones. That number is growing at about 10% per year. All those people have access to the sum of all human knowledge and the ability to educate themselves almost as well as (some would argue even better than) the students of the most expensive universities. They can communicate with anyone else at almost zero marginal cost, and can sell products and services to basically anyone else on the planet. All because things keep getting cheaper. That's the point of making things cheaper. Sure, a consequence of that is that the founders and executives and financiers of Google, Samsung, Apple etc are wildly rich. And that means they can (and do) invest in new products and services to keep improving peoples' standard of living, as well as funding benevolent projects. It's pretty amazing if you ask me.

dorian-graph 9y ago
> All those people have access to the sum of all human knowledge and the ability to educate themselves almost as well (some would argue even better) than students of the most expensive universities. They can communicate with anyone at almost no marginal cost, and can sell products and services to basically anyone else on the planet. Is this even happening though?
- tomhoward 9y ago
  Out of Coursera's 18 million registered learners, 1.3 million are from India with top registered learners hailing from Bengaluru, Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad, the website said today. Driven by the vast interest coming from Bengaluru, technology hub, nearly half of enrollments in the country are in technology courses such as computer science (25 per cent) and data science (18 per cent). - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/education/bengaluru-tops-online-learning-in-india-coursera/articleshow/52078732.cms http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/educat... Top Freelancing countries on Elance: India $312,865,112/649,566 freelancers United States $310,023,579/1,123,935 freelancers Ukraine $72,429,514/29,341 freelancers Pakistan $71,061,107/176,011 freelancers United Kingdom $35,320,646/126,670 freelancers Canada $31,379,228/85,639 freelancers Romania $28,062,831/44,305 freelancers Russia $27,416,743/21,045 freelancers Philippines $18,261,489/178,725 freelancers Argentina $17,796,295 China $17,518,704/28,752 freelancers Serbia $13,600,638/18,577 freelancers Bangladesh $11,092,326/66,970 freelancers https://www.elance.com/trends/talent-available/geo#GeoRanking https://www.elance.com/trends/talent-available/geo#GeoRankin...
  - nashashmi 9y ago
    And when you try net income per person, you get: Ukraine $2,468.54 Russia $1,302.77 Serbia $732.12 Romania $633.40 China $609.30
    - tomhoward 9y ago
      Thanks, I'm capable of using a calculator :D There will naturally be a distribution of incomes among those people, with some people earning little or nothing, and some people earning a lot. The point is that whatever the income a given person is earning, that is income that was unavailable to them before modern computing and communications devices became affordable to them. That's money that people are using to build better lives for themselves, their families and their communities. As I said, that is the point of making things cheaper.

alasdair_ 9y ago

If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.

alasdair_ 9y ago

If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.

alasdair_ 9y ago

If wealth was a zero-sum game, thia would make sense. Fortunately, it's possible to create new wealth so that everyone is better off, even if some get richer than others relatively.