Long-term benefits of the Coronavirus Pandemic

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
ilostabet said:
My point was that this shift was anything but natural.
Of course it's unnatural, it's required by the exponential growth required to sustain capitalism, the end goal being everybody made a slave.
But before we get to that goal it's like a game of musical chairs, and as long as many people play convinced they could win it works.

Interestingly here the musical chairs game is called the voyage to jerusalem :)
 

CynicalContrarian

Peacock
Gold Member
Burning Man festival is canceled for first time ever amid coronavirus pandemic - despite being scheduled for August 30

- Burning Man festival has been canceled for the first time due to coronavirus
- Organizers announced Friday that the arts festival will not take place in 2020
- The Nevada event usually pulls in about 80,000 people from across the world
- Cancelation of the August festival suggests some fear the pandemic and the lockdown rules could continue far longer than officials have said


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-canceled-time-amid-coronavirus-pandemic.html
 

infowarrior1

Ostrich
@Oberheirner

Our debt based currency and usury requires that constant growth or else it collapses.

More money has to keep being loaned in order for it to keep going.
 

presidentcarter

Ostrich
Gold Member
Simeon_Strangelight said:
void said:
Making shoes, sewing clothes has been moved to cheap labor countries. Counter question, which crafts are left that don't require the maker of the product to be in same area-code as the customer? Brick and mortar complete houses can't be shipped from cheap labor countries. Most other things can.
They did calculations even for NIKE sneakers or Iphones - all those products could be made easily in the West with full wages and regulations.

The products would get a couple percent more expensive, but the only thing that might change is the profit margin of big corporations. Outsourcing to slave-labor countries should be banned. It's as simple as that.

The US and Europe could produce everything at home - even toys since there are huge factories now which aid in the process.

It's one of the biggest lies pushed by the globalists that this is good and necessary. It's not - it's a con. One French CEO once mentioned in an interview that he was transferring factories from France not out of economic necessity, but because the coroporation received subsidies and taxcuts, als was more or less told by large shareholders to do it.

In theory you could concentrate all the shoe production in one giant factory in central China or North Korea - for the entire world. And then all the small to medium companies can just shove it.

The globalist plan is actually that - 50-60% unemployment for the useless eaters, frequent vaccines until they die in their masturbatoriums. This kind of globalization is a central stepping stone.

I have nothing against competition, but it should be tempered with long-term strategic interests for the people of that country. If you have a -5% unemployment, then you might consider offshoring some less important industries just so that you have no shortage of workers - or it's something that cannot be made in the country.
I agree with you but I'm not entirely on board with a few assumptions.

Calculating that Nikes or an iPhone would cost the same here is basically a back-yourself-in to whatever conclusion you'd like to have exercise aka mental masturbation at this point. Ignoring material and labors costs which are the obvious ones, factor in 401k matching that'll be expected, exponentially higher litigation costs (wrongful termination, slip n fall, etc.), increased insurance costs related to operating any plants, the list goes on for costs they'll incur that the Chinese or whomever else don't expect or have at a much lower price. What assumptions were in the model you preach to, and who ran the model, and what assumptions did the econometric model leave out (there's always a few)?

Basic tenet in free market economics is if you can have it made elsewhere for less, do it. You'll reap greater "utils" in the end; however, I'm not in full agreement with that because it ignores the fact that we have nations with different founding principles (so you can call free market economics globalist economics in that sense). Have you looked at operating margins across the board for manufacturing companies? "A couple percent more" would kill profitability for many of them. So less competition = higher prices = lower standard of living (see below). That's right, get back used to a 55" tv instead of that shiny new 70" for a while.

So if you differ from other nations on ethical or moral grounds as well as from a national security stance, moving the production home is the answer. Which is why I am for it.

But what most people don't realize is that we need to change some basic fundamentals of our economic and society in order for that to happen smoothly.

We all also need to be prepared to take a hit on standard of living for this transition to happen. It sounds like in your analysis it's an apples to apples shift and we have nothing to lose. But in reality we will sacrifice somewhat significantly in many cases - at least for a while until we dial in the perfect goods-to-service ratio in our economic output (never been done before).

It should be done, but it's a hell of a lot more involved than just building some factories and turning the power on.
 

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
presidentcarter said:
So less competition = higher prices = lower standard of living (see below).
But what does competition mean ?
It's almost always a simple race to the bottom.

Let's take your example of TVs, what do people see when buying ?
Size and price.
That's it.

Do they know how long before it breaks ?
How repairable it is ?
How much pollution it generated before (production), during (toxic paint, VOCs, etc) and after (recycling .. or lack thereof) its lifetime ?

If everything was being equal yes we could use some abstract concept such as competition.
But we are never comparing the same products, and in fact very, very far from it.
 

AntoniusofEfa

Woodpecker
Open Source hardware will get a massive boost from the current situation.

I will be the first one to buy a phone with an open source modem. At the moment, you do not know what goes on between the baseband modem and the phones CPU. I would buy a Fairphone if it was not an inferior piece of hardware.
 

AntoniusofEfa

Woodpecker
Oberrheiner said:
presidentcarter said:
So less competition = higher prices = lower standard of living (see below).
But what does competition mean ?
It's almost always a simple race to the bottom.

Let's take your example of TVs, what do people see when buying ?
Size and price.
That's it.

Do they know how long before it breaks ?
How repairable it is ?
How much pollution it generated before (production), during (toxic paint, VOCs, etc) and after (recycling .. or lack thereof) its lifetime ?

If everything was being equal yes we could use some abstract concept such as competition.
But we are never comparing the same products, and in fact very, very far from it.
Most people also buy based on image quality, but they just cannot afford the nicest TV's. I am for a mandatory right to repair, and having an automotive lifecycle requirement (15 year part supply and support) also for consumer electronics.
 
This bullshit mantra of laissez-faire liberal capitalists was repeated by me too after college.

COMPETE SERFS AND YOU WILL BE RICHER!

That works fine until you realize that you are expecting a 25$/hour workforce with decent environmental and safety regulations, with some generous hard-fought holiday and sick leave - TO COMPETE WITH slave-labor populations that get one week to see their children, that get poisoned by toxic environment due to to low regulations, that are utterly squeezed dry in terms of living standard and lifestyle.

You can expect some competition between companies within a similar system or France vs Belgium vs Germany vs Denmark. But once you add China or Vietnam to the mix, then it's not competition. The same could be said about joint markets with Mexico - you can do it with Canada for the US and that's about it.

Recommended watchin of American Factory - Netflix documentary - guess that some slip through or give you good predictive programming since China is the model state. They want to raze your regulations, perks, high wages, safety measures - compete serfs! And the best irony is that they and their children will never have to compete much - sure they have to reach minimum standards, but the Ivy League place with bad marks is theirs - also a well-paid job somewhere as VP of bullshit even if they are retards - they just put them into divisions that don't do too much damage. (I personally know such cases even if the sheisters have started using different avenues for their idiotic offspring - telling them to be enterpreneurs, do some financing over some startup, play boss and maybe be called a genius when much smarter men make it work once a while.)

 

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
AntoniusofEfa said:
Most people also buy based on image quality
Debatable, most panels cannot be calibrated to a standard, won't reproduce 24 (or 23,796) fps fluidly, don't have black blacks, often have totally overblown whites, interpolate images so that anything ends up looking like a vacation movie .. if you love cinema you usually don't buy a TV.

And let's not start on stereos (what makes boom boom the loudest gets bought), or live shows - where the only thing you hear anymore is the kick drum ..
Morons reproduced, and they're now everyfuckingwhere ! :(
 

Troller

Woodpecker
My kid wanted to buy more superzing toys. We´ve been ordering them from Amazon becaue he wants series 5 Superzing. He was googling and told me Aliexpress as cheaper superzings. Why couldn´t we order from them.
Explained him two things: first its chinese shit. So he will order one figure (Kid Fury) and they will probably send another toy. Probably a cheaper toy so he would be scammed. He will pay like 30 euros and they will send him a 5 euros toy. Second thing I told him is I never give money to chinese. They give to me in some real estate. I try to avoid as most possible anything chinese related because it´s not quality. Even real estate the least I contact with them the better.
 

Papaya

Crow
Gold Member
Troller said:
My kid wanted to buy more superzing toys. We´ve been ordering them from Amazon becaue he wants series 5 Superzing. He was googling and told me Aliexpress as cheaper superzings. Why couldn´t we order from them.
Explained him two things: first its chinese shit. So he will order one figure (Kid Fury) and they will probably send another toy. Probably a cheaper toy so he would be scammed. He will pay like 30 euros and they will send him a 5 euros toy. Second thing I told him is I never give money to chinese. They give to me in some real estate. I try to avoid as most possible anything chinese related because it´s not quality. Even real estate the least I contact with them the better.
China is asshoe!

 

paninaro

Woodpecker
There was a well-known clothing manufacturer whose entire selling point was all their products were made in the US. American Apparel. They filed for bankruptcy a few years ago.

A Canadian company bought the name and is trying to resurrect it. Only some of their products will be made in the US now. From the article:

American Apparel’s test of shoppers’ desire for goods made in the US — giving them the option to buy a $22 tee made in America or a $18 “globally made” tee — resulted in the finding that most people would rather buy the cheaper option.

“We came to the conclusion that the ‘American’ in American Apparel is not necessarily a place,” says Mazzucchelli, who joined the company in January 2016. “Customers care that we are ethically made and sweatshop-free. They don’t really care if we are ethically made in China, in Mexico, in Honduras, in the US, or in France.”
I'm skeptical most consumers are willing to spend more for a US-made option, when a non-US made option of similar features/quality is available for less.
 
What?! I had no idea American Appeal was made in USA. You'd think the very brand name would have alerted you to this fact. Sadly it's an indication we have no expectation of anything made in USA. The concept is just as foreign as having leaders with our best interests in heart.

Anyone else here knew this, and if so did you shop there? I wonder if vast majority of shoppers knew this when they visited the store.

Its not as if there's a sign in the store "Made in America ". Majority fail on their part. Too late to fire their advertising department now.

If I had, I'd gladly would have spent more money there. They have lost ten years plus worth of my clothing shopping.
 

presidentcarter

Ostrich
Gold Member
Simeon_Strangelight said:
This bullshit mantra of laissez-faire liberal capitalists was repeated by me too after college.

COMPETE SERFS AND YOU WILL BE RICHER!

That works fine until you realize that you are expecting a 25$/hour workforce with decent environmental and safety regulations, with some generous hard-fought holiday and sick leave - TO COMPETE WITH slave-labor populations that get one week to see their children, that get poisoned by toxic environment due to to low regulations, that are utterly squeezed dry in terms of living standard and lifestyle.

You can expect some competition between companies within a similar system or France vs Belgium vs Germany vs Denmark. But once you add China or Vietnam to the mix, then it's not competition. The same could be said about joint markets with Mexico - you can do it with Canada for the US and that's about it.

Recommended watchin of American Factory - Netflix documentary - guess that some slip through or give you good predictive programming since China is the model state. They want to raze your regulations, perks, high wages, safety measures - compete serfs! And the best irony is that they and their children will never have to compete much - sure they have to reach minimum standards, but the Ivy League place with bad marks is theirs - also a well-paid job somewhere as VP of bullshit even if they are retards - they just put them into divisions that don't do too much damage. (I personally know such cases even if the sheisters have started using different avenues for their idiotic offspring - telling them to be enterpreneurs, do some financing over some startup, play boss and maybe be called a genius when much smarter men make it work once a while.)

Laissez-faire capitalism within a network of like-thinking participants is still the most proven path to higher standards of living assuming low levels of corruption and high levels of competition (China's slave labor obviously doesn't fall within that definition of like-thinking participants and thus shouldn't be allowed to play/compete).

I think the part you missed was that China obviously doesn't play by the same rules and wouldn't be included.

As you mentioned in another post and something I'd tend to agree with you on is the nationalistic stance factor. You want sovereignty and self-sufficiency but you can still trade within a system and it be mutually beneficial.
 
< Sure - I want as much trade as possible while maximum employment for my people is assured and key industries remain in the country - basic food production (Japan - rice import ban, meat export ban etc) or basic industries that should be made within.

This however is not a given fact in the West.

As for proven path - actually it was the unions, massive pressure from the grassroots, even basic welfare as well as the wars - that raised living standards. The laissez-faire capitalism was present for centuries in the West from 1700 to 1900 with little improvements in living standards - actually it got worse in many areas. It was enterpreneurs like Ford as well as grassroots protests which made it happen. Also many Western countries feared communist revolutions within and those parties were huge becuase of laissez-faire capitalism. I too was brainwashed into this thinking in college.

The reality is that a balance has to be struck - a give and take and then once you struck that balance - you cannot outsource to slave-labor camps, then depend on the fired employees to pay for the same products. That won't work long-term. And that is what you see in the West getting broke while the wealth is syphoned off to China.

I like entrepreneurship and I want people to make big bucks, but within a sane framework. I would even make it much easier to start businesses - incentives, no taxes first 2-3 years, easy access to capital etc. The current corporate-lobbyist system actually prevents that - one of the reason for the success of Switzerland and Bavaria is that they have local interest-free currencies like the WIR and others which give access to small companies for really massive start-up capital. Most people don't know this about the silent industrial power-base of those areas. They have plenty of industries left there.
 

bucky

Pelican
dicknixon72 said:
ilostabet said:
In it, it is explained how to make something as basic as a pencil, you need an entire global network to function in perfect coordination. It is a celebratory video, of course, because it focuses only on the benefits of such a global system. The downsides are becoming, at least in part, apparent. If such a system is needed for a pencil, imagine how much more it is required for smartphones, computers and cars, and pretty much everything else.
Funny, because - as recently as the late 1980s - something as technologically-advanced as an automobile still had majority parts made by at least allied/friendly nations, if not domestically.

What was the foreign parts content of these?





For a country as God-given bountiful with an abundance of natural resources and man-made talent to choose to offshore vital production of everyday goods to save nickels and dimes is disgusting. I would gladly pay $250 more for an American television set or another $2500 for a car made 80%+ of US/Canadian components.
Back when I was single and had almost unlimited money, I had a pair of jeans that was made in the US. I paid over $200 for them ("fancy pants" as Owen Benjamin would have it). Even then, the fabric was imported. Who knows how much they would have cost with American-grown cotton, weaved in the US.

To be fair, I think this is inline with what people used to pay for clothes before globalization. For most of history it's my understanding that most people had not much more than one set of clothes, because clothing was incredibly expensive. This is probably why you see admonitions to "clothe the naked" in the Bible, because people sometimes had to literally walk around nude for lack of being able to afford clothes. Probably also why the soldier cast lots for Christ's clothing at the crucifixion. You wouldn't imagine Jesus dressed ostentatiously, but even a simple, plain robe back then was a thing of significant value. Even as recently as 100 years ago, most people probably only had two or three sets of pants and shirts, and one pair of shoes if they were lucky.

I've got...I don't know, maybe a dozen shirts in my closet right now, twice that if we count t-shirts, and my wardrobe isn't particularly large by today's standards. I would actually favor going back to more expensive, higher quality clothing made in the US myself, but I don't know if most people would be on board with clothing costing five or ten times more, and that probably doesn't only apply to clothing.
 
In different times with a superior culture, also, people dressed presentably even though they had fewer options or clothes changes. Have you ever seen older American films of the streets or 1930s baseball games? Every single man in the stands is wearing a suit and a hat.

Quality decreased generally as laziness increased and culture decayed.

It didn't have to always be that way as a stodgy rule, but there is no doubt that this is the direction and cultural creep. For goodness sakes, you have people these days who come to church in clothes not that far from pajamas. They wouldn't dare risk not being somewhat reasonably dressed for a job interview or work, but integrity in church of all places, is lost. While that's not the be all end all, it still is informative on what the culture values, beyond being an embarrassment.
 
Top