Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> As to de-industrialization, ultimately, it will lead to a better life > for all. Workers in the third world gain a much better standard of > living with out having to kowtow to the "Uncle" who owns the land or > whatever. Over time, the workers in the developing world will negotiate > for better wages/conditions. But then the capital will move again. After a few generations, we'll have a better world, but there will be a lot of rubble left behind all of these flights to greener pastures. But I understand your point. I just note that it's happening. I'll get to what worries me. > In the developed world, work will > intensify in the areas of design, marketing, creation, and smart > manufacturing. We in the developed world can not stand in the way of > the rest of the world gaining a better life. We will have to work > smarter with more intellectual input to continue our standard of living. There's a problem with "we" here. Today's news: "WASHINGTON - The ranks of the uninsured swelled by 2.4 million last year as insurance costs kept rising and more Americans lost their jobs and health care coverage." Now there are a lot of "we" in the US who are not on that gravy train, working smarter with more intellectual input. In fact, even those who do work: " Loss of coverage stemming from layoffs and scaled-back benefits was primarily to blame, Census Bureau analyst Robert Mills said. " Not only those losing their jobs, lose their benefits, but even those who have a job, are getting less coverage. Perhaps the solution (I'm going to be cynical, without really believing in what I say) ... the solution is: "Why take our jobs to the underdeveloped world, when we can dismantle our own right here and bring the underdeveloped world to us?" There are millions of people in the US who cannot adjust to the intellectually stimulating careers you mention. What to do with them? They're there, right? Well, we might as well exploit them, $200 a month, take it or leave it. Don't take it if you want to starve, take it and put your kids to work if you want a place to live too. Just don't get sick. > If the developed world can not offer better products/services then we do > not deserve so high a standard of living. Maybe you're right. Maybe that's what is happening. It seems though that the riches that have been built up could defensibly be used to "carry the weight" of those not making it (and those who PRODUCED the riches) in the brave new world. Take care! Daniel - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html