4 ms·

> Then the Wal-Mart opens and everyone is actually happier. Yes, they shop at Wal-Mart, and it's much more convenient for them. Then a couple of years later t

by user24 13y ago

> Then the Wal-Mart opens and everyone is actually happier. Yes, they shop at Wal-Mart, and it's much more convenient for them. Then a couple of years later they wonder where all the local businesses went, why all the towns look the same, why there are fewer jobs. It's naive to think that stopping the odd Wal-Mart or Amazon here and there will help, but it's also naive to think that just because a company is popular that it is doing good on a grander scale.

spongle 13y ago
This happened in suburban London. The supermarket was king. Then along came delivered groceries and everyone does that and just uses new "local supermarkets" to pick up a few impulse purchases and medicines. As a result, every row of shops is saturated with takeaways. There are very few traditional local businesses left. However, everyone is happier as they are not slaves to the requirement to drag stuff around themselves and can concentrate on more interesting things. No tears have been shed. We're all better off. People just need to now get used to the fact that there isn't a job for everyone as we've reached a pretty good efficiency ceiling.
- user24 13y ago
  > We're all better off. No, we're all more comfortable, while the economy is going to shit. > People just need to now get used to the fact that there isn't a job for everyone Please think about what you're saying.
  - spongle 13y ago
    That's always been the case. I did think about what I'm saying. Not everyone has a useful function in society. It's a total fallacy that jobs are available for all and that it's a good metric for the success of a society.
    - user24 13y ago
      > Not everyone has a useful function in society. It's a total fallacy that jobs are available for all and that it's a good metric for the success of a society. Ah right, I misunderstood your comment. You're taking the position that it's always been like this and the wall marts and amazons of this world are not part of the reason things are like this, and moreover you're saying that societies can be considered successful even with high or rising unemployment. It seemed to me like you were acknowledging that unemployment was rising and saying that people just had to get used to being jobless. Have I now understood your position correctly?
      - spongle 13y ago
        Spot on - yes you have.
        user24 13y ago
        I'm intrigued as to how a society could be considered successful (or sustainable) with rising unemployment. Let's see. My axioms (and bear in mind these are written in half an hour) are: 1) People cannot ever be equal. 2) Things are not of equal value. 3) People need and want things. 4) It is not possible for everyone to have everything they want. 5) People want to own things. 6) It would be simpler if people did not want to own things ;) 7) People are fickle. 8) Given 5 and 7, trade will naturally arise. 9) Barter is impractical at scale 10) Barter is impractical across nonlocal distances. 11) Given 8, 9 and 10, money will naturally arise as a token for items. 12) People do not have a constant natural supply of valuable items. 13) People do have a constant natural supply of time and energy, at least for as long as it matters. 14) To gain money, people can sell their items 15) To gain money, people can sell their time and energy 16) Given 12, 13, and 15, jobs will naturally arise as a way to gain money. At this point I start asking questions that are beyond my knowledge of economics. a) How does money stop having a hard relationship with the items it originally represented (aka the "Why can't I get five pounds of gold for my fiver any more" question)? b) How is the value of money set? c) If money is subject to (a), then doesn't trade in money critically undermine the value of money? But those notwithstanding, how do you rate my reasoning as to why jobs are essential to society? edit: perhaps I've only demonstrated that jobs are one way to gain wealth. That's what I'm asking really. Assuming I've not made some huge error with my axioms, what is your number (17) that allows people to acquire money without selling items or their time and energy?
Shivetya 13y ago
Amazingly, around every Wal-Mart near me there are more small businesses popping up than I want to count. Cars, public transportation, and now the internet, did/do more damage than anything to small businesses and people are not location trapped. Big box stores like Wal-Mart become a destination fostering business development nearby to take advantage of the situation

by user24 13y ago

spongle 13y ago

This happened in suburban London. The supermarket was king. Then along came delivered groceries and everyone does that and just uses new "local supermarkets" to pick up a few impulse purchases and medicines. As a result, every row of shops is saturated with takeaways. There are very few traditional local businesses left. However, everyone is happier as they are not slaves to the requirement to drag stuff around themselves and can concentrate on more interesting things. No tears have been shed. We're all better off. People just need to now get used to the fact that there isn't a job for everyone as we've reached a pretty good efficiency ceiling.

user24 13y ago
> We're all better off. No, we're all more comfortable, while the economy is going to shit. > People just need to now get used to the fact that there isn't a job for everyone Please think about what you're saying.
- spongle 13y ago
  That's always been the case. I did think about what I'm saying. Not everyone has a useful function in society. It's a total fallacy that jobs are available for all and that it's a good metric for the success of a society.
  - user24 13y ago
    > Not everyone has a useful function in society. It's a total fallacy that jobs are available for all and that it's a good metric for the success of a society. Ah right, I misunderstood your comment. You're taking the position that it's always been like this and the wall marts and amazons of this world are not part of the reason things are like this, and moreover you're saying that societies can be considered successful even with high or rising unemployment. It seemed to me like you were acknowledging that unemployment was rising and saying that people just had to get used to being jobless. Have I now understood your position correctly?
    - spongle 13y ago
      Spot on - yes you have.
      - user24 13y ago
        I'm intrigued as to how a society could be considered successful (or sustainable) with rising unemployment. Let's see. My axioms (and bear in mind these are written in half an hour) are: 1) People cannot ever be equal. 2) Things are not of equal value. 3) People need and want things. 4) It is not possible for everyone to have everything they want. 5) People want to own things. 6) It would be simpler if people did not want to own things ;) 7) People are fickle. 8) Given 5 and 7, trade will naturally arise. 9) Barter is impractical at scale 10) Barter is impractical across nonlocal distances. 11) Given 8, 9 and 10, money will naturally arise as a token for items. 12) People do not have a constant natural supply of valuable items. 13) People do have a constant natural supply of time and energy, at least for as long as it matters. 14) To gain money, people can sell their items 15) To gain money, people can sell their time and energy 16) Given 12, 13, and 15, jobs will naturally arise as a way to gain money. At this point I start asking questions that are beyond my knowledge of economics. a) How does money stop having a hard relationship with the items it originally represented (aka the "Why can't I get five pounds of gold for my fiver any more" question)? b) How is the value of money set? c) If money is subject to (a), then doesn't trade in money critically undermine the value of money? But those notwithstanding, how do you rate my reasoning as to why jobs are essential to society? edit: perhaps I've only demonstrated that jobs are one way to gain wealth. That's what I'm asking really. Assuming I've not made some huge error with my axioms, what is your number (17) that allows people to acquire money without selling items or their time and energy?

Shivetya 13y ago

Amazingly, around every Wal-Mart near me there are more small businesses popping up than I want to count. Cars, public transportation, and now the internet, did/do more damage than anything to small businesses and people are not location trapped. Big box stores like Wal-Mart become a destination fostering business development nearby to take advantage of the situation