7 ms·
it's worth noticing that ASUS didn't have to be scheming for the end result for that to happen - each stage involved them acquiring a bit more business, and mak
by v21 15y ago
it's worth noticing that ASUS didn't have to be scheming for the end result for that to happen - each stage involved them acquiring a bit more business, and making a bit more money. Their actions needn't have been the result of long-term thinking.
- rbanffy 15y agoWhich is even more perverse. The system self-destructs unless we consciously intervene.
- aspir 15y agoThis reminds me of the story of Roman conquerors' celebratory parades, with the slave saying "all glory is fleeting." It seems as if you must consciously intervene to prevent erosion; otherwise that story wouldn't be passed down as much as it has been.
- v21 15y agoBut who says the system self-destructs? The market has worked in this case - computers are yet cheaper, without a loss in quality. What outcome would be preferable?
- rbanffy 15y ago> What outcome would be preferable? A sustainable one. What happens when manufacturing moves from China to someplace even cheaper with harsher labor laws?
- metel 15y agoMillions more are lifted out of poverty
- rbanffy 15y agoYou know that there is some point you are no longer lifting people out of poverty, but forcing them to work for less, right?
- forensic 15y agoWhat if their country has no respect for human life? What if, instead of our liberal economic policies lifting Chinese people out of poverty, our liberal economic policies are allowing Chinese people to pull us down to poverty? Everyone assumes that the future will have wealthy Chinese and never considers that maybe it will just have poor Americans. Global neo-feudalism is the way the economy is going.
- aspir 15y agoIn this instance, I assumed that "system" referred to Dell's business model, which did in fact suffer. From a consumer perspective, as you're referring to, it was preferable.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- v21 15y agoAh yeah, that perspective makes sense. But on the other hand - what business model doesn't degrade over time? What magic that would be!
- ak217 15y agoThe system doesn't self-destruct. This is simply diffusion on a geo-socio-economic gradient.
- wpietri 15y agoThis is definitely more than diffusion. If it were only that, then we'd expect to see manufacturing become more evenly distributed. What we're seeing here instead is going from one strong concentration (lots of manufacturing here) to another (almost no manufacturing here). Of course, the system itself may be fine. But that doesn't mean that 30 years from now we'll like our place in it.
- metel 15y agoManufacturing output in the USA hasn't shrunk. Productivity gains mean there are fewer people employed in the sector. So I don't believe your scary statement is backed up by the facts.
- wpietri 15y agoI look forward to seeing the data that back your assertions.
- jeffool 15y agoIf you do a GIS for "US manufacturing output" you'll see what the GP is talking about. Worker productivity has shot up over time, as has output. In return, far fewer workers are needed. I see this as a simple truth: We have arrived at a time where we have far fewer jobs than workers, and this won't be getting better any time soon. Either we decide to become a country of wildly disparate classes being the norm (think the favelas of larger Brazilian cities), or we need to find a way to spread the wealth, as our current economic model isn't doing it. And I don't necessarily think some socialist fantasy will save us; I don't know the answer. I just know what we have isn't getting people who want to work, paid. Maybe eliminating the minimum wage will encourage employment. Maybe we do need to bite the socialism bullet, and instead of Social Security, give everyone a guaranteed minimum income with a negative income tax. Maybe we just need to make the legal work week 32 hours. (Or more strictly enforce 40.) I'm not claiming to have an answer. But the jobs are leaving, both our nation, and existence due to increased productivity and increased automation. Wealth is concentrating, and becoming idle. This is bad for us all.