I agree to a point. Heres the thing, its not advantageous to make widgets in places with low standards of living. Its advantages to make widgets in places with low standards of living and sell them in places with higher standards of living. People just scraping by don't buy a lot of luxery items. If the "equilibrium" gets pushed too far in one direction theres no one left to buy said items, or make them. Unfortunately, I think we're not very good at controlling the proportions that allow both groups to gradually improve themselves.

Look at Taiwan, once they were in the position the Mainland Chinese are in now. Now companies (even Taiwanese) are moving to the Mainland for cheap labor, so they're going through much the same things we've been going through for some odd years. The people have improved their positions as a result of this process, it just seems to be the price of success.

I think theres already some competition between India and China. How will they be able to compete with each other? Technology, automation, etc. etc. so in time I think we'll eventually clear out the last pockets, or at least the last large population pockets and things will be a little easier.

Bob:
>I suspect there will
> forever be pockets of poverty around the world. Mostly poverty has to
> do with lack of freedom.

Then why aren't we all still serfs under a feudal system? Eventually the peasants will revolt and/or outside powers will step in, and the people will find freedom. Its better for them and for us. I want the best for the China/India (et. all) people, in part because the higher their standard of living the more even the playing field and the easier it is for us to compete at a *mutually benefitual* level.

Richard Higginbotham
(speaking for me)

 

Hi Steve,

There's a few billion peope in the world who would love to have such jobs or any job for that matter. Some cultures consider Goverment jobs very high status although I'm not sure such a belief is good for the country and many service industry jobs in the developed countries pay very well indeed.

I guess my point is that it's unrealistic to expect that any one country can be entirely self contained and to make everything that they might need internally.

Countries such as the USA and Australia should not expect to be able to support large scale manufacturing of cheap, low tech or commodity consumer items. Our manufacturing will inevitable be concentrated in high tech, specialist areas. Either that or we will have to develop very highly automated factories which can manufacturer locally at very low cost and I'm not sure that's achievable for many types of goods. It also doesn't create jobs which was what this discussion was partly about.

For me (in Australia), decisions about buying locally manufactured goods or imported in most cases are a non issue. Their are no locally manufactured goods in the shops to buy and if their were I wouldn't be willing to pay double the price (or lots more) to purchase them. Regardless of this our economy does OK, growth is relatively high and unemployment is reasonably low. Just 6 months ago the property and business services sector of the economy exceeded manufacturing in size.

Trade and exports are a major contributor to our wealth. Isolationism for us would be a disaster.

Regards

Peter Whalley

Magenta Communications Pty Ltd

Melbourne, VIC, Australia

e-mail: peter*no-spam*@magentacomm.com.au
delete *no-spam* before sending

 

> I am not sure anyone is truly better off now than their equivalents
> were in the early 1970s. I read somewhere that many people are
> just as badly off in 2001 as they would have been in 1901.

Whoever wrote that was either delusional or purposely duplicitious by using the word "many" to imply something more than what it is.

> I have never seen freedom be a guarantee of wealth.

Nobody said there was a guarantee. But wealth can't be created by fiat or by taking it from someone else. Wealth is a natural, albeit potential, byproduct of economic freedom. Misery and poverty are the natural, and potential, byproducts of economic tyranny. Examples of this are available for all to see with simple comparisons: 1) India 1901 v.s. India 2001, 2) Singapore (GDP per capita: $24,700) v.s. Myanmar/Burma (GDP per capita: $1,500) to name just two examples.

Anyway, have a great holiday.

Best Regards,
Ralph Mackiewicz
SISCO, Inc.
6605 19-1/2 Mile Road
Sterling Heights, MI 48314-1408 USA
T: +586-254-0020 F: +586-254-0053
mailto:[email protected] http://www.sisconet.com

 

I have to assume that product-makers choose to locate their manufacturing facilities where they can get the most bang for their buck and sell them in a place that offers the same. The former is most often delegated to the regions of the world that offer the lowest cost-per-unit-produced indicates that these places offer harder workers, lower wages, and more political stability than thier competitors in a similar ecomonic situation.

But more importantly to us ( and everone else in the long run ), this fact reveals that automation has not reached its full potential. That should be good news for us.

A widget made close to its customers by an efficient, automated manufacturing process should cost less than one made in the same manner or by hand an ocean away. I don't yet wonder why my assembly-intensive Motorola cellular telephone was made in China, but I do have to wonder why the simple Christmas ornaments I bought last week were.

It would be best if commodities were automatically made in a location that was best suited to both the availability of the raw materials (plus labor) that compose them and the customers that want to buy them. This is the jist, as I understand it, of Robert Morley's (The Technology Machine) argument about the future of automation in manufacturing.

JK

 

well i do agree with bob about alot of his points but would like to point out that we do not want our country to become like many other countries such as mexico. we dont want open sewers or rampant crime any worse than we already have so we need the higher taxes and regulations, as well as oversight as for americans not wanting to work the lower paying jobs yes we do want them we will take them but we need to make min. wage and we cant employ children.

next quality cost money period. i wont buy cheap stuff because its bad for the enviroment, to much stuff being thrown in the land fill.
we are getting pollution from china when we demand that our companies follow strict guidelines to operate by but they continue to poison us with inferior product and toxic waste,perhaps people should stop suppourting these waste makers.