3 ms·

if businesses would not abuse cheap labor that china and other third world countries offer, we wouldn't be in this mess (or at least it wouldn't be as impactful

by xyst 6y ago

if businesses would not abuse cheap labor that china and other third world countries offer, we wouldn't be in this mess (or at least it wouldn't be as impactful) besides labor costs, it doesn't make sense that an item that is bought in from X company with an HQ in Y country has to be manufactured in Z country and shipped thousands of miles to the consumer. the amount of carbon generated from our reliance on third world countries must be ridiculously high, and wasteful.

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
"regions with low wages should not be permitted to increase the amount of available jobs and therefore increase the standard of living by shifting production there, this will <insert magic here> make things better"
- AtlasBarfed 6y ago
  Just don't pretend that essentially-slave labor in China doesn't lead to essentially-slave labor in other places if the sole purpose of practically applied economic theory is to arbitrage to the lowest common denominator.
  - MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
    Fixed-pie fallacy.
missedthecue 6y ago
Not sure why the word "abuse" was the first one out of your vocabulary. Asia is much better off thanks to expanded trade with the West, and the West has likewise benefited greatly.
tralarpa 6y ago
I don't understand why you have been downvoted. "abuse" is the right word. The "success" of the current model relies on (a) low production costs (not only cheap labor but also less social security, lower safety standards, less regulations for environmental protection, local governments that take care of troublemakers etc.) and (b)cheap energy which is needed for cheap transportation. Regarding point (a): Now that the Chinese workers are becoming too expensive (=they want two bowls of rice instead of one), companies are moving, like locusts, to other countries. And point (b): As you said, the carbon footprint is terrible.
- tralarpa 6y ago
  And the same thing happens in Europe too, on a smaller geographic scale of course. Danish and Dutch farmers send their animals to Germany for slaughter because it's cheaper there. Why? Well, if you followed the COVID news last year you know why.

by xyst 6y ago

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago

"regions with low wages should not be permitted to increase the amount of available jobs and therefore increase the standard of living by shifting production there, this will <insert magic here> make things better"

AtlasBarfed 6y ago
Just don't pretend that essentially-slave labor in China doesn't lead to essentially-slave labor in other places if the sole purpose of practically applied economic theory is to arbitrage to the lowest common denominator.
- MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
  Fixed-pie fallacy.

missedthecue 6y ago

Not sure why the word "abuse" was the first one out of your vocabulary. Asia is much better off thanks to expanded trade with the West, and the West has likewise benefited greatly.

tralarpa 6y ago

I don't understand why you have been downvoted. "abuse" is the right word. The "success" of the current model relies on (a) low production costs (not only cheap labor but also less social security, lower safety standards, less regulations for environmental protection, local governments that take care of troublemakers etc.) and (b)cheap energy which is needed for cheap transportation. Regarding point (a): Now that the Chinese workers are becoming too expensive (=they want two bowls of rice instead of one), companies are moving, like locusts, to other countries. And point (b): As you said, the carbon footprint is terrible.

tralarpa 6y ago
And the same thing happens in Europe too, on a smaller geographic scale of course. Danish and Dutch farmers send their animals to Germany for slaughter because it's cheaper there. Why? Well, if you followed the COVID news last year you know why.