3 ms·

He might not have a job now and at 52 maybe never again, but he needs to look at the positive side; likely due to labor offshoring a new Hyndai vehicle might en

He might not have a job now and at 52 maybe never again, but he needs to look at the positive side; likely due to labor offshoring a new Hyndai vehicle might end up being 30% cheaper.

cinquemb 8y ago
…that he might actually be able to buy without having a job once korean regulators give the green light for would-be investors to pour their and their friends/families life savings into making unsecured p2p loan platforms popular.
- petermcneeley 8y ago
  Exactly! and with all those physics and math phds in finance Im sure we can make sure that loan to a middle aged unemployed man mathematically seem rigorous and there is no way that a bailout will ever be required.
  - rectang 8y ago
    While I share your sentiments with regards to the plight of individuals left behind, I can't go with you on bailouts. That's socializing the losses while privatizing the profits, and it leads to crony capitalism and dyspeptic behemoths like the chaebols. The analogues in the USA are the too-big-to-fail financial institutions that almost wrecked us in 2007-2008, yet who remain as untouchable as the chaebols. Few of our congressional representatives actually believe in capitalism for the financial industry.
    - petermcneeley 8y ago
      Im sure your familiar with how banks get the money they loan out to people (Hint it has nothing to do with deposits). There is nothing capitalist about that system to begin with...
      - rectang 8y ago
        That's a confusing response. Are you advocating for government bailouts for chaebols and US banks?
        petermcneeley 8y ago
        Of course not! But im saying even without bailouts the banking system already is a collusion with government. Private banks take loans of money from the central bank at very low rates then add 2+% on top and provide those loans to consumers.
        fh973 8y ago
        Not exactly, the reality will sound even more annoying to you: banks don't need even need to get a central bank loan for most dollars they loan to customers. Only a fraction needs to be covered by central bank money.
  - cinquemb 8y ago
    Well if those math and physics phd's approach the problem like economists, I'm sure they'll make it such that after year or more without being employed, they'll be classified as no longer looking or in need of a job and thus can be safely excluded from any economic equations. Won't be too long now before iShares gets the go ahead for a new ETF: EP2PM, where everyone from retail investors to central banks all over the world can buy shares in emerging market p2p securities, we need everyone all over the world to be able to afford the $2k iPhones that will come out in the next 3 years.
aetherson 8y ago
And also other, poorer 52 year old men will have jobs. Which doesn't mean it doesn't suck for him.
- petermcneeley 8y ago
  Exactly! This reporter should have explained the details of comparative advantage to these recently unemployed individuals to help them see how much better they are off economically.
  - aetherson 8y ago
    While it's obvious why this guy would prioritize his own job over someone else's, it's pretty unclear to me why you would expect the reader to care. Why should I care if a South Korean person has a particular job versus a Chinese person or whatever? I don't know any of them. Even if I did prefer jobs to go to my own culture or country or ethnic group or whatever (I largely don't), these are all third parties to me and probably the vast majority of people reading this article. I can understand people who are opposed to globalization to the extent that it causes job loses in their own country -- even though I don't agree with them. But the logic of anti-globalization goes out the window when it's comparing two different third-party countries.
    - jannyfer 8y ago
      To me, the article’s main point wasn’t about one person losing a job, but about cities that are built around one industry.
    - brazzledazzle 8y ago
      The simple answer is that you care because of empathy.
    - rectang 8y ago
      > it's pretty unclear to me why you would expect the reader to care. Because even if the universe is indifferent and the problems of globalization are vexing we can see even people of other cultures as fellow humans and feel empathy for them?
closeparen 8y ago
He likely had the job in the first place because Hyundai exports to foreign markets, like the US.
gaius 8y ago
Unlikely; all products are sold at what the market will bear, irrespective of the cost of making them. So in fact Hyundai will be 30% more profitable and the managers who took his job away will get bigger bonuses which will in turn create jobs in the Rolex factory and also with luxury yacht makers, golf courses, and so on
simula67 8y ago
Please do not deploy demagoguery here
- petermcneeley 8y ago
  Yes I agree I went to far. Such Sardonicism belongs elsewhere online.

He might not have a job now and at 52 maybe never again, but he needs to look at the positive side; likely due to labor offshoring a new Hyndai vehicle might end up being 30% cheaper.

cinquemb 8y ago

…that he might actually be able to buy without having a job once korean regulators give the green light for would-be investors to pour their and their friends/families life savings into making unsecured p2p loan platforms popular.

petermcneeley 8y ago
Exactly! and with all those physics and math phds in finance Im sure we can make sure that loan to a middle aged unemployed man mathematically seem rigorous and there is no way that a bailout will ever be required.
- rectang 8y ago
  While I share your sentiments with regards to the plight of individuals left behind, I can't go with you on bailouts. That's socializing the losses while privatizing the profits, and it leads to crony capitalism and dyspeptic behemoths like the chaebols. The analogues in the USA are the too-big-to-fail financial institutions that almost wrecked us in 2007-2008, yet who remain as untouchable as the chaebols. Few of our congressional representatives actually believe in capitalism for the financial industry.
  - petermcneeley 8y ago
    Im sure your familiar with how banks get the money they loan out to people (Hint it has nothing to do with deposits). There is nothing capitalist about that system to begin with...
    - rectang 8y ago
      That's a confusing response. Are you advocating for government bailouts for chaebols and US banks?
      - petermcneeley 8y ago
        Of course not! But im saying even without bailouts the banking system already is a collusion with government. Private banks take loans of money from the central bank at very low rates then add 2+% on top and provide those loans to consumers.
        fh973 8y ago
        Not exactly, the reality will sound even more annoying to you: banks don't need even need to get a central bank loan for most dollars they loan to customers. Only a fraction needs to be covered by central bank money.
- cinquemb 8y ago
  Well if those math and physics phd's approach the problem like economists, I'm sure they'll make it such that after year or more without being employed, they'll be classified as no longer looking or in need of a job and thus can be safely excluded from any economic equations. Won't be too long now before iShares gets the go ahead for a new ETF: EP2PM, where everyone from retail investors to central banks all over the world can buy shares in emerging market p2p securities, we need everyone all over the world to be able to afford the $2k iPhones that will come out in the next 3 years.

aetherson 8y ago

And also other, poorer 52 year old men will have jobs. Which doesn't mean it doesn't suck for him.

petermcneeley 8y ago
Exactly! This reporter should have explained the details of comparative advantage to these recently unemployed individuals to help them see how much better they are off economically.
- aetherson 8y ago
  While it's obvious why this guy would prioritize his own job over someone else's, it's pretty unclear to me why you would expect the reader to care. Why should I care if a South Korean person has a particular job versus a Chinese person or whatever? I don't know any of them. Even if I did prefer jobs to go to my own culture or country or ethnic group or whatever (I largely don't), these are all third parties to me and probably the vast majority of people reading this article. I can understand people who are opposed to globalization to the extent that it causes job loses in their own country -- even though I don't agree with them. But the logic of anti-globalization goes out the window when it's comparing two different third-party countries.
  - jannyfer 8y ago
    To me, the article’s main point wasn’t about one person losing a job, but about cities that are built around one industry.
  - brazzledazzle 8y ago
    The simple answer is that you care because of empathy.
  - rectang 8y ago
    > it's pretty unclear to me why you would expect the reader to care. Because even if the universe is indifferent and the problems of globalization are vexing we can see even people of other cultures as fellow humans and feel empathy for them?

closeparen 8y ago

He likely had the job in the first place because Hyundai exports to foreign markets, like the US.

gaius 8y ago

Unlikely; all products are sold at what the market will bear, irrespective of the cost of making them. So in fact Hyundai will be 30% more profitable and the managers who took his job away will get bigger bonuses which will in turn create jobs in the Rolex factory and also with luxury yacht makers, golf courses, and so on

simula67 8y ago

Please do not deploy demagoguery here

petermcneeley 8y ago
Yes I agree I went to far. Such Sardonicism belongs elsewhere online.