4 ms·

It isn't a particularly good idea to build something on survivorship bias. For everyone who got into computers and found a booming industry there were people wh

by hoaw 8y ago

It isn't a particularly good idea to build something on survivorship bias. For everyone who got into computers and found a booming industry there were people who were into something else which didn't boom, or never got he chance to be into something in the first place. There are talented people who should but can't get into the tech job market, working lowly IT jobs or in other ways aren't doing so well. Undue regulation can be bad, but providing a way for people to do something isn't. By saying that something shouldn't be formalized you essentially being protectionist as well. Just from organized rather than unorganized competition.

hippich 8y ago
I agree with that, where I got a life chance someone else probably did not get a pay raise or got fired. Now the question is what is fairer, can it be more than zero-sum game, and is there a set of regulations that will make everyone benefit.
- scottlocklin 8y ago
  Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs. Except maybe short term looting interests of top tier capitalists. Even Henry Ford understood this. High labor costs are why people want to live in the US in the first place; it sure ain't the food or the beautiful architecture.
  - briandear 8y ago
    > Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs. False. China wouldn’t have grown to be such a powerful economy if their labor costs were high. The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. As far as why people want to live in America? That one is easy: opportunity. Try to start a business in India. Now, try to start that same business in the US. That diff is why people want to be in America. A narrow example, but very illustrative. France has higher labor costs than the US as a percentage of revenues, but the US consulate in Gaungzhou had lines around the block for immigrant visas while the French consulate does not. Switzerland has higher labor costs than the US, but their consulate in Bogota is practically empty, while the US consulate is swamped. It isn’t the labor costs, it’s the opportunity.
    - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
      >China wouldn’t have grown to be such a powerful economy if their labor costs were high. The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. This is the best defense of sweatshop labor, to be sure, but it’s hardly got legs in the end. First, “better off” bares defining, and “average” plays a big role in your claim. China is less homogenous than ever before, of course. It’s social make-up is a tremendous mystery for the most part. Second, are we assuming average Chinese would not be “better off” now than they would be without rabid labor abuse by the billions and free global trade? That’s a heavy assumption to make. Third, China is a world leader now in a way that it was not 30 years ago. China itself is a world power, and to only measure the “better offness” of the Chinese would be to completely discount the global nature of the stage in which China operates... The average American is not better off now, and America’s industrial business with China is obviously an important consideration in why. And, of course, does China impact the quality of lives in other countries? (hint: yes)
    - munk-a 8y ago
      > "Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs." False. > [...] > The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. You were trying to highlight how China has become a much more powerful economy - but you forgot some crucial steps there. As recently as 20 years ago "Made in China" was printed on every cheap thing in America and the populace of China was no better for it, the economy was entirely geared toward export and there was very little international purchasing power available. In the past two decades wages and internal consumption have shot up in China and this has allowed the ascent of the economy, all of the Chinese ports in Africa and Asia and infrastructure investment is being driven by internally generated wealth - that economic power isn't derived from American pocket books. An export focused economy is very vulnerable to international pressures and it's quite hard for nations or regions in this state to actually fund internal education and business development, it's much more likely that every spare inch of profit margin is held hostage by the importer's majority status and extracted from the county.
    - scottlocklin 8y ago
      I'd move from the US to Switzerland in a heartbeat if they'd let me in. Your examples are basically saying "the US is giving away residency too cheaply and those other countries are not." If it had something to do with prosperity through cheap labor; everyone would move to China, wouldn't they?

by hoaw 8y ago

hippich 8y ago

I agree with that, where I got a life chance someone else probably did not get a pay raise or got fired. Now the question is what is fairer, can it be more than zero-sum game, and is there a set of regulations that will make everyone benefit.

scottlocklin 8y ago
Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs. Except maybe short term looting interests of top tier capitalists. Even Henry Ford understood this. High labor costs are why people want to live in the US in the first place; it sure ain't the food or the beautiful architecture.
- briandear 8y ago
  > Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs. False. China wouldn’t have grown to be such a powerful economy if their labor costs were high. The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. As far as why people want to live in America? That one is easy: opportunity. Try to start a business in India. Now, try to start that same business in the US. That diff is why people want to be in America. A narrow example, but very illustrative. France has higher labor costs than the US as a percentage of revenues, but the US consulate in Gaungzhou had lines around the block for immigrant visas while the French consulate does not. Switzerland has higher labor costs than the US, but their consulate in Bogota is practically empty, while the US consulate is swamped. It isn’t the labor costs, it’s the opportunity.
  - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
    >China wouldn’t have grown to be such a powerful economy if their labor costs were high. The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. This is the best defense of sweatshop labor, to be sure, but it’s hardly got legs in the end. First, “better off” bares defining, and “average” plays a big role in your claim. China is less homogenous than ever before, of course. It’s social make-up is a tremendous mystery for the most part. Second, are we assuming average Chinese would not be “better off” now than they would be without rabid labor abuse by the billions and free global trade? That’s a heavy assumption to make. Third, China is a world leader now in a way that it was not 30 years ago. China itself is a world power, and to only measure the “better offness” of the Chinese would be to completely discount the global nature of the stage in which China operates... The average American is not better off now, and America’s industrial business with China is obviously an important consideration in why. And, of course, does China impact the quality of lives in other countries? (hint: yes)
  - munk-a 8y ago
    > "Everyone benefits from a society with high labor costs." False. > [...] > The average Chinese is better off than they were 30 years ago. You were trying to highlight how China has become a much more powerful economy - but you forgot some crucial steps there. As recently as 20 years ago "Made in China" was printed on every cheap thing in America and the populace of China was no better for it, the economy was entirely geared toward export and there was very little international purchasing power available. In the past two decades wages and internal consumption have shot up in China and this has allowed the ascent of the economy, all of the Chinese ports in Africa and Asia and infrastructure investment is being driven by internally generated wealth - that economic power isn't derived from American pocket books. An export focused economy is very vulnerable to international pressures and it's quite hard for nations or regions in this state to actually fund internal education and business development, it's much more likely that every spare inch of profit margin is held hostage by the importer's majority status and extracted from the county.
  - scottlocklin 8y ago
    I'd move from the US to Switzerland in a heartbeat if they'd let me in. Your examples are basically saying "the US is giving away residency too cheaply and those other countries are not." If it had something to do with prosperity through cheap labor; everyone would move to China, wouldn't they?