29-01-2003 02:50									#182
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Ned, the solid-state revolution was only 30 years old in 1980. Now it's 50 years old and is finally coming of age. Parts are cheaper, the labour that's used to put them together is cheaper (not due to offshore production) and the TVs themselves are simpler from a manufacturing point of view. What used to be a mess of circuit boards and inductors is now a couple of cheap microprocessors...

	29-01-2003 05:33									#183
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Sava Capitalism works for the rich... that's about it. I wonder why people think that the socio-economic conditions in America are vastly superior than the rest of the world. Some people watch too much TV I guess... Imagine this is Europa Universalis. There's a slider bar for Communism --- Capitalism. USSR on the left, the USA on the right... somewhere in the middle is where we ought to be. Sure, people consider me a leftist, but that's only because everyone else is so far to the right. I want an economy/system that provides health care, education, and ample job/career opprotunities for its people while ensuring health competition and free markets for consumer goods. It's not unreasonable, it's not a pipe-dream, and it just requires a little compromise. Does absolute Communism work? No Does absolute Capitalism work? No Can there be a gray area that ensures the type of dream I described? Yes But it's just easier to argue with one another instead of working together to improve things.

Sava, there is very little to disagree with here. The social safety net is important to take the rough edges off of capitalism.

	29-01-2003 05:52									#184
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara You seem to be operating under the assumption that it is wrong to believe and advocate tat people have the right to make a living wage and not live in industrial filth. If people who believed what you say had their way, there'd only be a Third World.

Che, the example given in the article and most examples that I know of suggest that the wages Western companies pay in the Third World are "princely." No one is suggesting that Western companies are hiring below the poverty line. Quite the opposite.

As to environment - well the companies are gone from the US - so the US environment improves. Have you been to Pittsburgh recently. No more steel mills at all. Vanished. They were shut down and never rebuilt.

But, we are not talking here solely about living in filth vs. living in a absolutely pure enviroment. I have seen too many environmentalist drop by my house asking me to sign a petition on some enviromental initiative who proudly proclaim that they stopped the building of this refinery or that power plant or this chemical plant. What am I to think about this? They stopped the building of the plants even though they would comply with environmental regulaitons.

The enviromental left are extremists who care little about the environment and more about damaging business. Well, they succeeded, in large measure, and have driven certain kinds of business completely out of the United States.

And now the anti-globalists, composed mainly of environmentalists, appear and complain. They say the corporations are unfairly moving jobs to the Third World to avoid US environmental laws. Duh!

Che, business work on the bottom line. They produce products and services at the lowest cost - or else their competitor kills them. As the unions and the environmentalist added costs to American manufacturing, business reacted to reduce costs. First they moved to the South. Now they move to South Asia. What in the world did you expect?

	29-01-2003 06:37									#185
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by DuncanK . So typical of the right wing. You say that capitalism works better because of the success the Imperialists have had at preventing third world countries from being successfull using Communism. In the same way (and I'm not saying this is you in particular) you assume that white males are superior to minorities. The capitalist nations have had every advantage just as white males have had in America. Furthermore the Imperialist nations have been hostile towards weaker Communist nations just as many white males are hostile towards minorities in industrialized nations. Just because white males have prospered more in our societies doesn't mean that they are superior and just because Imperialist nations have been successfull at exploiting third world societies and determining their outcomes doesn't mean that their ideology is superior. It only means that they have had every advantage. They have had all the resources and all the technology. Third world nations declare war on every idustrialized nation in the world when they become Communist. How can you rate the benefits of Communism just because of recent history?

I'm sorry Duncan, but resorting to global theories to explain day to day decisions by individual businessmen won't cut it. When such a businessman decides to invest in a particular country, he or she is looking for a number of things: including political stability, infrastructure, a convertible currency, a relatively well educated workforce, low taxes, favorable environmental, workplace and other laws that impose costs, etc. etc. etc. If everything works out, the investment is made.

If a third world country, communist or not, is hostile to business, has little or nor infrastructure, has no convertible currency, has an uneducated or lazy workforce, has extreme envirnomental or other laws that impose excessive cost, or anything else worthy of note, such as lack of intellectual property protection, the investment will not be made. You will be surprised that businessmen will factor everything into account and will make an investment even in communist countries if it makes business sense. Look at China, for example of massive Western investments.

	29-01-2003 06:58									#186
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Ned Che, the example given in the article and most examples that I know of suggest that the wages Western companies pay in the Third World are "princely." No one is suggesting that Western companies are hiring below the poverty line. Quite the opposite.

You are off in your own world, Neddie. $5.15 an hour is indeed a princely sum in India, where many of our call center jobs are going. It's not as if people working at call centers make some tall cash or even enough money to have much of a life on, but now even this is denied them?

quote: As to environment - well the companies are gone from the US - so the US environment improves. Have you been to Pittsburgh recently. No more steel mills at all. Vanished. They were shut down and never rebuilt.

The steel mills shutting down had nothing to do with the environment. It was because steel companies got arrogant and didn't modernize, just like the car companies, and they got their asses kicked. One steel pipe making factory in Birhmingham, AL, profiled on a recent Frontline, ACIPCO, follows environmental regulations, pays its employees a decent wage, ensures a safe work place, and still makes a profit. Obviously, labor costs and regulations aren't the problems.

You expect First World workers to accept Thrid World wages, to live in shitholes like Tiajuana, Mexico, because that's what you're trying to sell. Workers have a right to decent pay at decent conditions without having the company pour its filth into their communities. It doesn't matter what part of the world you live in. Companies go abroad because they can find corrupt governments who will kill people who get in the way of business screwing over the little guy. It's sick that you stand up for them.

	29-01-2003 07:02									#187
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Chegitz, that frontline piece was done in conjunction with a cbc show (think it was "The Fifth Estate") and washington post (?)

That was an interesting example of cross-border cooperation to go after a cross-border crook (MacWane)...

	29-01-2003 07:14									#188
	Full PM-box? Change here!

That is one evil company, founded solely because MacWayne felt the other company was too nice to its employees.

	29-01-2003 07:17									#189
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

That one got to me too.

Up here they stressed anticompetitive business practices engaged in by MacWayne in locking up the Canadian market (90%)

	29-01-2003 07:33									#190
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

When companies move into Third World countries, the price of labor goes up, not down. If they werent there, wages would be much lower

And Ned, don't generalize. I'm on the left, but I'm pro globalisation.

	29-01-2003 07:41									#191
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia When companies move into Third World countries, the price of labor goes up, not down. If they werent there, wages would be much lower

In the First World, however, it acts as a downward pressure on wages within industries that are locating abroad. Garment workers make **** wages in this country. They make **** wages abroad and have to work in sweat shops to boot.

Abroad it depends on the company. For example, workers in Mexican autoplants do quite well, considering. On the other hand, many maquiladora workers live in what can be called shacks only if you are being generous. Very often, companies that relocate fail to pay even the local minimum wage. Since they have bribed the government, there's little workers can do about it but organize, and that has a tendency to get people dead.

	29-01-2003 07:45									#192
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Well then it's not the US government or the corporations fault. Its the fault of the institutions of the host third world country.
If garment workers make so little money then they should unionize.
You gotta remember, that corporations are like beasts. If you don't reign them in, you will get catastrophic results. However, its up to the governments/ employees to held reign them in.

	29-01-2003 07:47									#193
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

And yeah, there would be downward pressure on wages in the 1st world country - until the wages in third world countries increase, in which case they will import more goods from the 1st world countries, which will imake more profits for the companies, who will hire more, and which will help the economy.

It's a win win situation.

	29-01-2003 07:50									#194
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia Well then it's not the US government or the corporations fault. Its the fault of the institutions of the host third world country.

It's still all part of anti-democratic nature of capitalist globalization.

quote: If garment workers make so little money then they should unionize.

And when they try, you get people like Ned acting as apologists for the industry when it closes down union shops and runs for the border. That's part of the effect of globalization, making people afraid to fight for their rights for fear they'll lose even the crumbs that they have.

	29-01-2003 07:57									#195
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

No they arn't anti-democratic. Corporations try every single way to try to squeeze their costs and maximize their profits. If they didn't attempt to do that, then goods would be way overpriced.

If they go to a country where corruption is rampant, then it is up to the government of that country to protect its people. The corporations is merely trying to get an edge on its competitors.

And if the garment industry closes down because the costs is too high, well then tough luck - the country has outgrown the production of garments and those people should get a different job. We arn't about to put up tariffs to protect a very tiny percentage of the population, because this will cost the other 99% hundreds of thousands of dollars.

	29-01-2003 08:19									#196
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia 1. American companies see cheap labor in India. They fire american workers, go to India, and hire new ones for 1/4 the price and get roughly the same quality and output. 2. These goods are then shipped back to america (the market for software in India is tiny) where they are resold. 3. The company who went to India realises that it can sell its good s for less and still make a healthy profit because its costs are less 4. It cuts its prices, resulting in cheaper stuff for us americans, and also increase competition between the other suppliers which may cut the price anymore 5. Who loses? The person who asks for too much money to work because of 1. greed, or b. union rules, or c. cost of living. 6. Who wins? Everyone else.

Why is the cost lower in India? One factor is the cost of living is lower, but a major factor is the lax environmental and labour laws allow TNC's (transnational corporations) to cut costs by cutting safeguards, dump toxins into rivers, and treat workers like slaves. Corruption could let them even totally ignore these laws.

The losers here are the workers. The only winners are the TNC's.

	29-01-2003 08:25									#197
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia Corporations are going to increase their supply until they have reached the profit maximization point. If their costs have decreased, they will increase the supply and decrease the price, and sell more and in the end make more profits then if they had simply pocketed it.

That wouldn't happen unless the market is perfectly competitive, with the demand being elastic to boot. For example, the rice market here is perfectly competitive, because rice is pretty much the same regardless of source. But the market is inelastic, people won't eat more rice just because the price is lower. So when the market was deregulated, the priced dipped initially, but came back up after a while.

	29-01-2003 08:27									#198
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia When companies move into Third World countries, the price of labor goes up, not down. If they werent there, wages would be much lower And Ned, don't generalize. I'm on the left, but I'm pro globalisation.

el Lawrence, there indeed many on the left who are pro-globalization. Most responsible democrats are, including Clinton.

The anti-globalization types are either the extreme left or the extreme right. It they seem to live in a very bizzare fantisy world of conspiracy theories and extremism. It is amazing that they have any credibity whatsoever since the failure of the USSR and the New Way in China.

But they do cause enough problems that make investment in certain countries risky. These countries tend to have significant communists parties even if they don't always elect communists. It would be risky at best to put a factory in such a country.

And any country that has a brutal dictatorship running it is completely off limits. Only a fool would invest in such a country.

	29-01-2003 08:29									#199
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by DanS Had to have started in the 80s Here you are, in real $... A good 10% increase.

Dan, that's the average again. It gets skewed easily when a few people get very rich quickly. What about the median and mode earnings?

	29-01-2003 08:38									#200
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui You'd do much better if your movement wasn't hijacked by a bunch of people that want to destroy Starbucks and McDonalds.

These corporations are viewed as symbols of Capitalism's excesses and flaws. They are held to sell packaged crud to the unwary.

There is a famous case in the UK where McD sued a small activist organisation for libel, whose members passed out flyers on the harmful effects of McD food. It dragged on for years and McD won in the end. This added more fuel to the cotrovery, now these corporations are also held to use the laws unjustly to silence their small distractors.

	29-01-2003 08:39									#201
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Ned Che, the example given in the article and most examples that I know of suggest that the wages Western companies pay in the Third World are "princely." No one is suggesting that Western companies are hiring below the poverty line. Quite the opposite. You are off in your own world, Neddie. $5.15 an hour is indeed a princely sum in India, where many of our call center jobs are going. It's not as if people working at call centers make some tall cash or even enough money to have much of a life on, but now even this is denied them?

Che, don't set up straw men. It makes no difference if the replaced worker was making $50 an hours. If the same work can be done offshore for a lot less, it will be.

This is nothing more than the invisible hand that Adam Smith described two hundred years ago. The difference today is that the internet and planes have shrunk the globe so that a India is effectively closer today to New York than New York to Boston were when this country was founded. We live in a world economy. Jobs will go to areas of the world where costs overall are lower. Nothing can change this except, perhaps, a world war.

In this enviroment, countries cannot legislate work conditions and rules, and certainly cannot impose business costs with impunity. The businesses will leave as they can in a free society.

	29-01-2003 08:53									#202
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ned Consider the disk drive. The move to offshore manufacturing began in the '80s and by the mid '90s was substantially complete. Has the price of a disk drive remained constant? No, it has dropped like a rocket. Why? - because costs are dramatically lower.

The dominating factor in this is competition. HDDs manufacturing is a high volume low profit margin business. HDDs manufacturing is not a labour intensive process, but you need huge initial investment in equipment and factory and you need skilled labours, not unskilled ones. The intense competition droved innovations in manufacturing methods to cut costs, thus the slew of mergers in the 80s and 90s.

Also note that the move was mostly to Singapore, not exactly a Third World country.

	29-01-2003 08:57									#203
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I see I have started something. I thank Che, Ramo and everyone else who showed up to discuss there thoughts on the true effects of free trade and corporations using foriegn labor, yet selling there services at the same prices (or higher). They pretty much summed up my arguement.

I dont feel there is any positive impact on the first world economy whatsoever if a corporation sells its products to the west, yet uses the profits to further expand servicing and mfg. overseas to continue to feed the demand in the first world. The only benefit I see is the rich getting richer and re-investing the profits to get even richer.

Besides. I have to agree with Che here. These corporations gain unimaginable influence oversea's, hold down labor movements, and pollute alot. Saw a special not to long ago that had mountains of computer parts in China. Dangerous, extremely dangerous. Kids playing near Capacitors from motherboards, Sharp gold plate cards, Moniters. It was pretty disgusting, IMO. It was a generic producer of components for PC's that supplied US vendors. The workers lived in a shanty town nearby.


FYI, When I built my home computer I was actually very suprised to see most of the components made in America. With the exception of the AMD proccesser made in malayasia and the Asus motherboard and CD ROM(Taiwan) Case (Thailand). Everything else was made in the US or Europe. (Moniter, Modem, RAM, and G4Ti4200..which suprised me)

	29-01-2003 08:59									#204
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Im more likely to buy stuff thats made in western countries lately. Its usually about the same price as the other stuff anyway.

	29-01-2003 09:03									#205
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger The dominating factor in this is competition. HDDs manufacturing is a high volume low profit margin business. HDDs manufacturing is not a labour intensive process, but you need huge initial investment in equipment and factory and you need skilled labours, not unskilled ones. The intense competition droved innovations in manufacturing methods to cut costs, thus the slew of mergers in the 80s and 90s. Also note that the move was mostly to Singapore, not exactly a Third World country.

Competition!

Precisely. Each company outdid the other not only to increase capacity, but to reduce costs. In 1990, there were over 30 disk drive companies: many of these made disk drives in the US. Today there are but a handful left. Four are US companies. (One an IBM/Hitachi JV.) Three are Japanese (including Hitachi) and one Korean. Seven in total. None make disk drives in the US.

Singapore indeed is a prime location for disk drive manufacturing. However, so is Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and China.

	29-01-2003 09:06									#206
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

And everything was made in america because we have a comparitive advantage in the capital necessary to produce these goods. 3rd world countries have a comparitive advantage in labour, so labor intensive industries move there.

	29-01-2003 09:06									#207
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ned C/E is a very broad topic. Let's just pick something that hasn't changed very much in 20 years. Let's pick 19" color TV sets and disk drives for desktop computers.

Both have changed a lot, but I will stick with HDD's since I know about that more.

quote: Originally posted by Ned Twenty years ago, a two-platter desktop disc drives cost $500 + and delivered a whopping 5-10 megabytes of storage. Today's two platter a desktop disk drive delivers 40-80 gigabytes of storage and costs $100-$200 dollars.

Correction: modern day HDDs use far more than two platters. Six, eight, or even ten.

quote: Originally posted by Ned Certainly, the essential components of the TV sets and the disk drives then are the same as they are now. They simply cost less and are much better, for that matter.

Well, if you put it that way. Say, a HDD is consisted of the casing, the platters, the R/W head assembly, motors, and control electronics. But, if you look beneath the surface, nothing is the same as it was 20 years ago - even the casing has shrink. For example, the platters now use a different material for substrate, and the magnetic coating can hold a much higher density. Ditto with other parts.

quote: Originally posted by Ned But, why do the components cost less? They too are made offshore. Circuits, heads, disks, motors - all are made offshore.

Other important factors - miniturisation and automation. If you look at a TV, the electronics have evolved from vacuum tubes to transistors to ICs to programmable controllers. When workers were used to require to assemble a PCB, now a machine does all the work. All these result in greater efficiency, lowering the costs.

	29-01-2003 09:07									#208
	Increase Your PM Length

Ned Disk drives isnt even a human manufacturing job anymore. Its mostly machines that do it all now.

"None make disk drives in the US."

My Seagate is. Says made in the USA.

	29-01-2003 09:11									#209
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Also Pny Ram and the USR (3Com) modem in USA.


Man Im bored, really wanna get an OS on that system. I cant wait till I get enough for XP. Grrrr!

	29-01-2003 09:12									#210
	Got spare money?

quote: Ned Disk drives isnt even a human manufacturing job anymore. Its mostly machines that do it all now.

It's called capitalism, fg. It's inherant in the word 'capital' . In theory, machines should replace much of human labor through the technological progress.