7 ms·

Along the lines of this article, there's the dilemma/contradiction faced by modern globalisation in that money can move much faster and more freely than labor.

Along the lines of this article, there's the dilemma/contradiction faced by modern globalisation in that money can move much faster and more freely than labor. In previous iterations (late 1700s, 1800s and the first few decades of the 1900s) labor and money moved at basically the same speed: as an investor, your capital (gold/silver, then whatever money instrument replaced it) took the same boat/train/carriage as labor. This had a moderating effect, and the system was able to almost always equalize itself in terms of trade and investments flows.

ryandrake 6y ago
Capital also doesn't need a passport and visa to cross borders.
- andrewjl 6y ago
  That's not the case in countries that have capital controls. Some of the biggest economies today do.
- Frost1x 6y ago
  Capital also doesn't need, I dont know: basic human social needs like a stable group of friends, family, loved ones and community opposed to living a nomadic drifter chasing money/jobs instead of wild game like hunter gathering civilizations.
  - tspike 6y ago
    Your point is taken, but hunter/gathering civilizations tended to be very stable groups of friends, family, loved ones and community. The entire group was nomadic.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Very strange point - many people cross borders alone and start anew. Good luck crossing without documents
    - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
      Many people with documents don’t cross borders and start anew.
- novok 6y ago
  Try owning US stocks without being subject to US regulations in a foreign brokerage account.
  - vkou 6y ago
    For the overwhelming majority of businesses in the world, compliance with US law (To the extent required of them by the US) is vastly easier than it for the overwhelming majority of humans in the world to get a US passport. There is, however, a very loud minority of people whose business revolves around actively violating US financial laws, who run into problems when they provide their services to the US market.
pratik661 6y ago
The Islamic world in the Middle Ages had a system of decentralized money transfer (hawala) where capital could be moved virtually across any region that had a trusted hawala intermediary. European aristocrats in the 1700s (and probably before) from different countries were also able to open lines of credit in other countries. It’s actually referenced in Count of Monte Cristo.
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  But information traveled as slowly as people then, unless we're talking about short distances that pigeons could cover (or I guess something equivalent to the pony express, but that seems unlikely). They still had to send a courier to actually deliver the message to exchange the money, and there may very well have been a requirement of receiving this message (otherwise how would you know that the money hadn't already been moved since there can be a weeks to months long delay between messages)?
  - brobdingnagians 6y ago
    I think one of the major benefits of it is that you can send one courier with information about the passwords and money amounts, without having to send a wagon or boat load of specie. That one person can travel much faster than a caravan and there is no risk of theft. A caravan takes large amounts of preparation and is a target for robbers.
  - pratik661 6y ago
    Human travelers need rest. Horses get tired, etc. A message can be transferred to a fresh courier. In fact the ancient Persian empire had a system where horses were stationed at regular intervals so that a message could travel across the empire without halting.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    Telegraphy was invented in the late 18th century and electric telegraphy in the 19th.
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
zcw100 6y ago
Interestingly, the situation where labor can't move as freely as capital might not hold in the case of remote work which is why working from home is, or should be, scaring the hell out of some people. If it doesn't let me paint a picture. CEO comes in and checks their email. There's an email from his development team lead. "Dear CEO, The team and I had a discussion and and we no longer have confidence in your ability to usher this project to a successful outcome and have decided to work for company X in country Y. We have ceased development for your project at 8:17am and will be working for X as of 8:18am.
- dundarious 6y ago
  Even so, that will be an option for a minority of workers.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  Isn't the inverse true as well? While this could have some downside re compensation, I look forward to employers smoothing the on/off-boarding process. Nothing is more frustrating than engaging with incompetent coworkers who are only around because it is too hard to find a replacement.
- matthewmcg 6y ago
  This is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. On the whole, these legal protections strongly advantage capital vs. labor, though California residents might benefit from their state’s hostility to non-compete clauses.
  - jk700 6y ago
    > This is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. Those are empty threats if the team is not from the CEO's litigious country.
elsonrodriguez 6y ago
We've been able to move money virtually ever since the knights templar.
- dpoochieni 6y ago
  Yes but the actual settlement was much slower, which put a bound on it. Plus, the risks involved were way higher due to speed of communication. One might easily own businesses in different countries today, but at 100 years ago. One needed to partner up which lead to a sharing of profit.
PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
> money can move much faster and more freely than labor. That's a result of political choices made in many jurisdictions, it's not a law of nature. The EU made a very conscious decision to tie free movement of labor to free movement of capital within its operating zone (probably the only such economic agreement of its kind). The choices that the US has made are entirely favorable to capital, and entirely disfavorable to all non-professional labor. The only upside I can see (and I'm not alone in this) is cheap consumer goods that have obscured the true cost and depth of wage stagnation over 35 years.
- pnw_hazor 6y ago
  In 1789 the US made a very conscious decision to tie free movement of labor to free movement of capital within its operating zone (probably the first ever economic agreement of its kind). The US is a union of sovereign states.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
    The US (other than for 8-12 years after the revolution) is a federal republic. The EU is not federal and is not a republic.
    - pnw_hazor 6y ago
      The Union of States made that mistake too in 1781.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > That's a result of political choices made in many jurisdictions It definitely makes it more difficult, but a lot of it is a "law of nature" because moving is expensive, time consuming, risky, and you give up your local connections. There's a reason for the metaphor "putting down roots."
disown 6y ago
It's not just the monetary instrument, it's also the rules of international trade. Bilateral/multilateral "free" trade agreements are created to enable capital to move across borders while movement of people/labor is limited or less privileged. For example, you can relatively easily buy citizenship in the US, canada, most of europe, etc if you have enough capital. But if you are a person or worker, you have to jump through a lot more hoops to get citizenship in another country. The world is capital-centric rather than people or labor centric.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ryandrake 6y ago

Capital also doesn't need a passport and visa to cross borders.

andrewjl 6y ago
That's not the case in countries that have capital controls. Some of the biggest economies today do.
Frost1x 6y ago
Capital also doesn't need, I dont know: basic human social needs like a stable group of friends, family, loved ones and community opposed to living a nomadic drifter chasing money/jobs instead of wild game like hunter gathering civilizations.
- tspike 6y ago
  Your point is taken, but hunter/gathering civilizations tended to be very stable groups of friends, family, loved ones and community. The entire group was nomadic.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Very strange point - many people cross borders alone and start anew. Good luck crossing without documents
  - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
    Many people with documents don’t cross borders and start anew.
novok 6y ago
Try owning US stocks without being subject to US regulations in a foreign brokerage account.
- vkou 6y ago
  For the overwhelming majority of businesses in the world, compliance with US law (To the extent required of them by the US) is vastly easier than it for the overwhelming majority of humans in the world to get a US passport. There is, however, a very loud minority of people whose business revolves around actively violating US financial laws, who run into problems when they provide their services to the US market.

pratik661 6y ago

The Islamic world in the Middle Ages had a system of decentralized money transfer (hawala) where capital could be moved virtually across any region that had a trusted hawala intermediary. European aristocrats in the 1700s (and probably before) from different countries were also able to open lines of credit in other countries. It’s actually referenced in Count of Monte Cristo.

Judgmentality 6y ago
But information traveled as slowly as people then, unless we're talking about short distances that pigeons could cover (or I guess something equivalent to the pony express, but that seems unlikely). They still had to send a courier to actually deliver the message to exchange the money, and there may very well have been a requirement of receiving this message (otherwise how would you know that the money hadn't already been moved since there can be a weeks to months long delay between messages)?
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
  I think one of the major benefits of it is that you can send one courier with information about the passwords and money amounts, without having to send a wagon or boat load of specie. That one person can travel much faster than a caravan and there is no risk of theft. A caravan takes large amounts of preparation and is a target for robbers.
- pratik661 6y ago
  Human travelers need rest. Horses get tired, etc. A message can be transferred to a fresh courier. In fact the ancient Persian empire had a system where horses were stationed at regular intervals so that a message could travel across the empire without halting.
- philwelch 6y ago
  Telegraphy was invented in the late 18th century and electric telegraphy in the 19th.
brobdingnagians 6y ago

zcw100 6y ago

Interestingly, the situation where labor can't move as freely as capital might not hold in the case of remote work which is why working from home is, or should be, scaring the hell out of some people. If it doesn't let me paint a picture. CEO comes in and checks their email. There's an email from his development team lead. "Dear CEO, The team and I had a discussion and and we no longer have confidence in your ability to usher this project to a successful outcome and have decided to work for company X in country Y. We have ceased development for your project at 8:17am and will be working for X as of 8:18am.

dundarious 6y ago
Even so, that will be an option for a minority of workers.
s1artibartfast 6y ago
Isn't the inverse true as well? While this could have some downside re compensation, I look forward to employers smoothing the on/off-boarding process. Nothing is more frustrating than engaging with incompetent coworkers who are only around because it is too hard to find a replacement.
matthewmcg 6y ago
This is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. On the whole, these legal protections strongly advantage capital vs. labor, though California residents might benefit from their state’s hostility to non-compete clauses.
- jk700 6y ago
  > This is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. Those are empty threats if the team is not from the CEO's litigious country.

elsonrodriguez 6y ago

We've been able to move money virtually ever since the knights templar.

dpoochieni 6y ago
Yes but the actual settlement was much slower, which put a bound on it. Plus, the risks involved were way higher due to speed of communication. One might easily own businesses in different countries today, but at 100 years ago. One needed to partner up which lead to a sharing of profit.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago

> money can move much faster and more freely than labor. That's a result of political choices made in many jurisdictions, it's not a law of nature. The EU made a very conscious decision to tie free movement of labor to free movement of capital within its operating zone (probably the only such economic agreement of its kind). The choices that the US has made are entirely favorable to capital, and entirely disfavorable to all non-professional labor. The only upside I can see (and I'm not alone in this) is cheap consumer goods that have obscured the true cost and depth of wage stagnation over 35 years.

pnw_hazor 6y ago
In 1789 the US made a very conscious decision to tie free movement of labor to free movement of capital within its operating zone (probably the first ever economic agreement of its kind). The US is a union of sovereign states.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  The US (other than for 8-12 years after the revolution) is a federal republic. The EU is not federal and is not a republic.
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    The Union of States made that mistake too in 1781.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dehrmann 6y ago
> That's a result of political choices made in many jurisdictions It definitely makes it more difficult, but a lot of it is a "law of nature" because moving is expensive, time consuming, risky, and you give up your local connections. There's a reason for the metaphor "putting down roots."

disown 6y ago

It's not just the monetary instrument, it's also the rules of international trade. Bilateral/multilateral "free" trade agreements are created to enable capital to move across borders while movement of people/labor is limited or less privileged. For example, you can relatively easily buy citizenship in the US, canada, most of europe, etc if you have enough capital. But if you are a person or worker, you have to jump through a lot more hoops to get citizenship in another country. The world is capital-centric rather than people or labor centric.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]