5 ms·

Could we reframe this in a way that takes both supply and demand sides into consideration? Something like: There's a lot of stuff to ship, but margins on those

Could we reframe this in a way that takes both supply and demand sides into consideration? Something like: There's a lot of stuff to ship, but margins on those things are very thin + demand for said stuff is extremely elastic due to it not being super essential so there's also not a lot of room for increased driver wages.

kspacewalk2 5y ago
This is a much better framing of the problem. And a much clearer case for automation.
amoorthy 5y ago
Well said! Thank you.
shostack 5y ago
Thank you. The one sided view we typically see on this, while in m supporting my views on paying people what they are worth, often glosses over that this isn't evil fat cat monopolists with monocles trying to keep the man down in all these cases. Entire business models or industries may no longer be viable without major pricing changes throughout the solid k supply chain, which will ultimately give the consumer sticker shock. It's a hot mess. Doesn't mean drivers shouldn't get paid more, but also doesn't mean it's pure selfish capitalism on behalf of those hiring them.
- watwut 5y ago
  Truck drives tend to be truck owners doing independent jobs. And when the switch from wages to this happened, they were in fact massively taken advantage off. There was a lot of fraud or at least lying involved. A lot of one sided contracts putting all disadvantages on drivers. And then working drivers to exhaustion just pay debts. It is not that customer would not buy product for 10 cents more. It is that, companies that took advantage of drivers had competitive advantage and grew to own market.
edge17 5y ago
I would add that if manufacturing moves back to the US in any meaningful way, prices across the board will go up and consumption will go down. A lot of those thin margins will get crushed anyway, especially because - as you pointed out, much of the demand is elastic.
- donw 5y ago
  Why wasn't this a problem from 1950-1970 or so?
  - inetknght 5y ago
    I would argue that was because the revenue was more evenly distributed across the workforce instead of being focused in the few at the top.
  - kortex 5y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  Maybe that's a a good thing? Per https://phenomenalworld.org/interviews/trade-wars-are-class-wars https://phenomenalworld.org/interviews/trade-wars-are-class-... the rest of the world is chucking all sorts of junk at once --- per the high elasticity of the demand we barely want it but "oh fine" we'll take another shift if they are just that cheap. If we're the dollar exporter, we should be able to call the shots in other ways. Dollars for democracy (hah), dollars for rail not cars, etc. etc. It's a massive soft power and develop-for-greater-good opportunity, but we choose to get inundated with cheap crap instead.
- AtlasBarfed 5y ago
  Shipping things across the ocean is externalizing carbon impacts of shipping emissions. It shouldn't be nearly as cheap as it is. Also, overseas manufacturing amounts to environmental law arbitrage, enabled by falsely cheap shipping costs, so you can pollute as much as you want in Indonesia or China or India or whatever and then ship it to environmentally-restricted US. And we're enriching our enemies (China) and technologically and infrastructurally enabling them. All things that also aren't priced into the "cheap goods". Free trade arguments also fail when China does massive government investment to block access to emergent manufacturing markets by unsubsidized countries. And they manipulate their currency. America should be onboard with righting the actual carbon emissions cost of goods shipment, but come on, the rich are getting rich off of that in America and don't give two shits about the middle class or future prosperity of the USA. After all, they're all buying fortress estates in New Zealand for the forthcoming collapse that they themselves are willfully enabling.

kspacewalk2 5y ago

This is a much better framing of the problem. And a much clearer case for automation.

amoorthy 5y ago

Well said! Thank you.

shostack 5y ago

Thank you. The one sided view we typically see on this, while in m supporting my views on paying people what they are worth, often glosses over that this isn't evil fat cat monopolists with monocles trying to keep the man down in all these cases. Entire business models or industries may no longer be viable without major pricing changes throughout the solid k supply chain, which will ultimately give the consumer sticker shock. It's a hot mess. Doesn't mean drivers shouldn't get paid more, but also doesn't mean it's pure selfish capitalism on behalf of those hiring them.

watwut 5y ago
Truck drives tend to be truck owners doing independent jobs. And when the switch from wages to this happened, they were in fact massively taken advantage off. There was a lot of fraud or at least lying involved. A lot of one sided contracts putting all disadvantages on drivers. And then working drivers to exhaustion just pay debts. It is not that customer would not buy product for 10 cents more. It is that, companies that took advantage of drivers had competitive advantage and grew to own market.

edge17 5y ago

I would add that if manufacturing moves back to the US in any meaningful way, prices across the board will go up and consumption will go down. A lot of those thin margins will get crushed anyway, especially because - as you pointed out, much of the demand is elastic.

donw 5y ago
Why wasn't this a problem from 1950-1970 or so?
- inetknght 5y ago
  I would argue that was because the revenue was more evenly distributed across the workforce instead of being focused in the few at the top.
- kortex 5y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system
Ericson2314 5y ago
Maybe that's a a good thing? Per https://phenomenalworld.org/interviews/trade-wars-are-class-wars https://phenomenalworld.org/interviews/trade-wars-are-class-... the rest of the world is chucking all sorts of junk at once --- per the high elasticity of the demand we barely want it but "oh fine" we'll take another shift if they are just that cheap. If we're the dollar exporter, we should be able to call the shots in other ways. Dollars for democracy (hah), dollars for rail not cars, etc. etc. It's a massive soft power and develop-for-greater-good opportunity, but we choose to get inundated with cheap crap instead.
AtlasBarfed 5y ago
Shipping things across the ocean is externalizing carbon impacts of shipping emissions. It shouldn't be nearly as cheap as it is. Also, overseas manufacturing amounts to environmental law arbitrage, enabled by falsely cheap shipping costs, so you can pollute as much as you want in Indonesia or China or India or whatever and then ship it to environmentally-restricted US. And we're enriching our enemies (China) and technologically and infrastructurally enabling them. All things that also aren't priced into the "cheap goods". Free trade arguments also fail when China does massive government investment to block access to emergent manufacturing markets by unsubsidized countries. And they manipulate their currency. America should be onboard with righting the actual carbon emissions cost of goods shipment, but come on, the rich are getting rich off of that in America and don't give two shits about the middle class or future prosperity of the USA. After all, they're all buying fortress estates in New Zealand for the forthcoming collapse that they themselves are willfully enabling.