Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7989)	4/13/2006 2:51:09 PM
From: GraceZ	Respond to of 24758

The US went through the sweatshop stage (both my parents worked in factories at some point) when we transitioned from agrarian to industrial, as did England. In the US, we went from a nation of 90% self-employed multi-skilled farmers to mostly specialised wage labor. It was a painful transition but it made us richer. I think what bothers me about the Chinese situation is that the powers that be have tried to limit the movement of people to where they want to flow. There is no worse abuse of human rights than to dictate to a person what that person can do to make a living for themselves and their family. The reason they've withheld land rights to the farmers has a lot to do with the condition prior to Communism, where most of the small farmers were just tenants and the land was held by large wealthy land owners (this is something of a tautology because in an agrarian society land equals wealth). They think (correctly) that if farmers have ownership of their land they will turn around and sell it. Then move to the cities where they can make a living in the factories, losing the ability to feed themselves except by wages. Instead of being hostage to the weather and the supply of water, they will be subject to world economic winds, as we are. Land again will get concentrated in the hands of large owners. This is where it needs to go because only with large scale operations like we have in the US can they get beyond sustenance farming in their rural areas.

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7989)	4/13/2006 3:06:31 PM
From: deeno	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

"with all due respect get real" First Im not Ah. "labor does not dictate what drives the capitalist..." Dictate? GM, dock workers, Delta? "for now they are just the cheapest sub contract bidder for manufacturing" So sub contracters cant be capitalists? "what happens when they are undercut by say, africa?" Um... then they will have to change. You mean capitalist cant be undercut? they cant lose? "as a capitalist, i could not care less whether my labor is 'cheap' or not" Um..I guess then your not very labor intensive. But not caring less? Give me what you call a "capitalist company" that uses labor and couldnt care less? "what i care about is productivity and profit... cheap labor is by far no guarantee of that, in fact in this environment, it is the opposite obviously 'cheap' is in the eye of the capitalist beholder....what i look for is value....and i reward accordingly" Thank you for making my point. Sweatshops as you call them provide employment to people in need of a job. Once they have a job they can look out for better opportunities. When they look, companies will look at their value and the sweatshop will either let them go if there is no value or entice him to stay (hence Bene's in my last post). I see nothing non-capitalistic about this. Isnt that what happened to the Japan Steel industry? Are they communists? Now I happen to agree with you and grace on property rights but just because their labor cost are lower does not make them non-capitalist. In a lot of way Ah's right they are moving to more business freedoms and we are moving more to a state/federal dictated business climate. GO STEM CELLS!

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7989)	4/13/2006 3:17:29 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

well perhaps i did not elucidate sufficiently but my greater point is that without property rights, those 'sweat shop' workers have absolutely no motivation or aspiration to move beyond simple 'wages' because true ownership is precluded by the state How about survival? Too alien of a concept for an individual wearing the empror's new clothes? Or is it too fat from borrowing from Peter to pay Paul? it seems pretty simple to me... by definition, communist china cannot be a true capitalist society without real human and property rights reform... By definition you're nation is going broke while China is getting wealthier. I'd say that the the ipso facto truth of it lies in the results! for now they are just the cheapest sub contract bidder for manufacturing.... Showing how little you know about China? what happens when they are undercut by say, africa? or even the ME (once they lose their commodity edge with oil) Africa? How about Coxie's Army? ME? They believe in Islam. without property rights, it is truly a 'race to the bottom' Why are you scrambling for the money? Racing for the bottom? and as an entrepreneur who employs, i must disagree with 'labor at the cheapest possible price' meme as 'capitalistic' You're operating against little competition. Things are fat in fantasy land. labor does not dictate what drives the capitalist... GM's unions are monopolies and they're in full control, not Rick Wagoner. as a capitalist, i could not care less whether my labor is 'cheap' or not. Spoken like a true deluded closet socialist doing business in Fairlyland. You could care less whether your labor is cheap or not? This was the attitude of most American coporations when the ROW was socialist. .. what i care about is productivity and profit... !!! Better go back to Econ 1 and fgure out what profit is. Only in America could you run an operation that has no concern for cost of labor. cheap labor is by far no guarantee of that, in fact in this environment, it is the opposite Ridiculous nonsense. I'm getting tired of this persistent bullshit. obviously 'cheap' is in the eye of the capitalist beholder....what i look for is value....and i reward accordingly It's all about rewards and punishments, huh? You wouldn't last 10 minutes in the construction industry, or any other industry whetre you can't just play at production. Maybe you'd like to explain how GM is going broke. You seemed to glibly elide over that point of mine earlier. GM looks for value and rewards it with non-competitive compensation. That's what you do too, and like GM, you've been able to get away with it, but the dies irae is coming that won't tolerate your largesse of fat. i can hire people all day long who are 'cheap' but will wreck my equipment, alienate my customers, and do nothing to engender growth.... How would you know? but yippee! i can pay minimum wage with no bene's Better learn to pay below minimum.