Long-term benefits of the Coronavirus Pandemic

Truly positive long-term changes:

Less population.
Less traffic on the streets.
Far less people travelling and flying - plenty of room in airports and tourism locations where you will be treated like royalty.
Cheap gas prices.
Sexual market value increase of any man who is working/safely employed/truly above average in wealth.
The giant UBI eternally unemployed class will manifest in many dysfunctional phenomenons, so I don't think that there is much positives to be found there except far easier and better pickings if you are a well-off sugardaddy. It's a positive even if it's a hedonistic and dysfunctional one.
 

void

Pelican
Oberrheiner said:
void said:
Our western welfare states made manual labor too expensive.
Not true.
Anything not low-end and also not generic enough to bring big economies of scale can be made locally to a competitive price.

I have a recent example with guitars - if you are in the market for a $2000 or more guitar you're better off asking a local luthier than buying off-the-shelf.
The quality will be better, it will be more suited to you, you'll be buying local, it has only advantages.

But people hate facing that, because they would then have to admit that they are poor, and why would they need to give out so much money when they can get something which looks the same from indonesia for half the price or less.
Of course the quality is not the same at all but hey, it's half the damn price and that's already more than they want to give out ! I mean it has the same number of strings and pickups so it should be fine right ? :)

Then the same people complain when their boss outsources their job so some 3rd world country and try to convince him that he's not getting the same quality - ha !
guitar building is a niche and there are some instrument builders left (as niche craftsman shops)
 

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
Hmm ok we seem to have a different definition of niche (I think over 20 million guitars are produced each year ?) but I'm always open.
Plus nowadays culture for most people is more watching reality tv than playing an instrument so maybe you're right.

Do you have an example of a product requiring manual labor (since that's the subject) which is not niche to you then ?
It's late and I'm tired, not many relevant examples come to my mind.
 

void

Pelican
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.
 
I think it would be really short sighted to think that the West "cant compete" on cost.

We're at a point where robots and 3d printers are quickly becoming available to ordinary entrepreneurs.

This sector will have such a huge boom, it is absolutely predictable and everyone who wants to make money, needs to get on it. Either through investments or becoming a Maker or incorporating it.

I always thought this would happen, as early as the early 10s, but then that process was sidelined in favor of cheap migrant labor in the West.
 
Maybe normies will decrease the amount of worship that is given to professional athletes, musicians and other celebrities (i.e. Hollywood)? Greater emphasis on self improvement and becoming your own "celebrity".

Doctors and medical professionals (even those in public health and health care management) are grossly overpaid (and some are corrupt like the American Medical Association, pharmaceutical industry and their lobbyists in D.C.) in the U.S. -- it is nice to see them being given proper due and respect during the pandemic globally. At least from what I have seen from videos in Spain.
 
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.
 

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
void said:
Making shoes, sewing clothes has been moved to cheap labor countries.
Not entirely, that's the thing.
The high-end is still there, and it makes total economic sense to buy that, for us, right now.

I'm not sure exactly how productive it is to talk about what could be maybe done in the future etc.

void said:
Counter question, which crafts are left that don't require the maker of the product to be in same area-code as the customer?
Many in fact, we simply mostly don't know it - and yes, that includes the two you've cited, shoes and clothes.

It's more of a mentality problem, instead of having a collection of $40 sneakers which will end up in the plastic continent, you should have 3 or 4 nice leather pairs made locally.
Yes those will cost 3 or 400, but they will last you a lifetime, be more comfortable, healthier, and look much better of course.

But to most people a $400 pair of shoes is just crazy.
Except it's taken someone two to four days to make it - how much salary would you demand for 2-4 days of except hand work ? Plus materials, rent, taxes and whatever else ..
 

Easy_C

Crow
Simeon give me a source for that profitability calculation.

I want to see if I can duplicate the assumptions and forecast.
 
Necessity is the mother of invention.

Do we really believe that the people who 50 years ago put man on the moon, invented the internet, built MR scanners, robots, artifical intelligence, genetic splicing, and everything else, can't figure out a way to produce things locally?

This is a question of economic structures in society and politics.

At the moment, people like Bezos, Gates and Jack Ma, are scoring ALL the profit. There's no one saying it has to be that way. Economics of scale doesn't mean that an iPhone would double in cost, far from it, since the profit is taken on so many units, the cost can be offloaded on each unit produced.

I'd really like to see some serious calculations about these scenarious and they should include increased purchasing power of the lower middle class in such a situation.
 

ilostabet

Kingfisher
Oberrheiner said:
void said:
Making shoes, sewing clothes has been moved to cheap labor countries.
Not entirely, that's the thing.
The high-end is still there, and it makes total economic sense to buy that, for us, right now.

I'm not sure exactly how productive it is to talk about what could be maybe done in the future etc.

void said:
Counter question, which crafts are left that don't require the maker of the product to be in same area-code as the customer?
Many in fact, we simply mostly don't know it - and yes, that includes the two you've cited, shoes and clothes.

It's more of a mentality problem, instead of having a collection of $40 sneakers which will end up in the plastic continent, you should have 3 or 4 nice leather pairs made locally.
Yes those will cost 3 or 400, but they will last you a lifetime, be more comfortable, healthier, and look much better of course.

But to most people a $400 pair of shoes is just crazy.
Except it's taken someone two to four days to make it - how much salary would you demand for 2-4 days of except hand work ? Plus materials, rent, taxes and whatever else ..
This fight is anything but new, it's only coming now to a head.

Lord Byron wrote this back in 1812, in opposition to a bill (ultimately approved) to crack down on the people who were fighting back against the abolition of their way of life for the profits of a few - what was to become the final nail in the coffin of the artisan, and the beginning of a new era of industrial production and disposable consumption:

 

Oberrheiner

Kingfisher
Of course it's nothing new, it's economics 101 : TCO vs cost of acquisition only.
You don't even need to consider the social implications, just do the math and you'll buy local.

Yet all the morons buy chinese shit then complain ..
 
I don't give a rat's ass about current-supposed calculations which claim that an Iphone made in the US would have to cost from 2000$ to 30.000$. There are decent calculations I read that talked about 10-20% higher cost tops.

Most people don't know that countries used to do all electronics and appliences in the US and Europe themselves - TVs, computers, phones - the supply chains existed and factory workers made 1980s and 1990s early wages - some of them made decent dough. Most people were able to afford a TV and appliences without any difficulty even if it was produced a couple miles from home.

Now the sheisters come up with supply-chain calculations - some of them not existing in the West anymore, to calculate pricings of 30.000$ for an Iphone - as if you are going to build that phone in your own model production unit and have the parts produced by hand each. Car factories still exist in the West and they could up the automation more if they wanted to - it's profitable enough.

Nevermind - if you are a believer in globalism, offshoring, then you get your way - your 60% unemployed post-coronial dystopia is under way and you may think that it's necessary. I simply know that it's not. And honestly no one would even care if the Iphone costed 3000$ if everyone was earning 5.000$ to 20.000$ per month in a true usury-free, flat-tax, true free-market system. Maybe then even the Chinese wouldn't need suicide nets.

Some changes in production are maybe good - I can be convinced of a 20 hours workweek at equal pay. The globalists could pay that, but they don't want to. They prefer to go into a Judge Dredd society. And I really mean it - our technological output efficiency is high enough to have mostly men work for 20 hours a week and make decent money. But the elite wouldn't like that kind of freedom and time on our hands, also no sane happy families with non-working wives who listen to their husbands. Plus they would make billions less in profits which they need to enslave the world and pay for all those feminists, transgender classes and to bribe politicians and virologists.
 

ilostabet

Kingfisher
My point was that this shift was anything but natural. Up until the industrial revolution, humans were inclined to not be morons in this respect. But they were forced into this by political seizure of common land, abolition of feudal obligations, seizure of Church property and finally by violent repression and destruction of free laborers. Only after this incredibly amount of internal violence from the State towards its own people did they transition into the current mode, because the 'local' production became rather expensive and instead of barter workers now employed in factories only had money (and very little of it) to trade with.

From a 1770 tract 'on Trade and Commerce':

«That mankind in general, are naturally inclined to ease and indolence, we fatally experience to be true, from the conduct of our manufacturing populace, who do not labour, upon an average, above four days in a week, unless provisions happen to be very dear.... I hope I have said enough to make it appear that the moderate labour of six days in a week is no slavery.... But our populace have adopted a notion, that as Englishmen they enjoy a birthright privilege of being more free and independent than in any country in Europe. Now this idea, as far as it may affect the bravery of our troops, may be of some use; but the less the manufacturing poor have of it, certainly the better for themselves and for the State. The labouring people should never think themselves independent of their superiors.... It is extremely dangerous to encourage mobs in a commercial state like ours, where, perhaps, seven parts out of eight of the whole, are people with little or no property. The cure will not be perfect, till our manufacturing poor are contented to labour six days for the same sum which they now earn in four days.»
 
acco said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
Truly positive long-term changes:
Less population.
...
So Billi Sicko's vaccine isn't so bad after all, or am I misunderstanding?

:s
Let's talk again after one or more family members or friends have strange immune deficiency diseases or your child is infertile and has major different diseases.

Yeah - they could kill a lot via this crap since so many believe in it now.

I would be relaxed over population growth - all models show that we would peak around 9 bio. and then fall to possibly 7 or far less in the next centuries. If you want to lower population, then focusing on the development of Africa would be the fastest way. Even the partiarchal wealthy gulf states have birth rates barely at maintenance level. We might not even reach 9 bio. if that was done. But whatever - let's go with the enslavement, poverty and vaccines.
 

acco

Robin
Simeon_Strangelight said:
acco said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
Truly positive long-term changes:
Less population.
...
So Billi Sicko's vaccine isn't so bad after all, or am I misunderstanding?

:s
Let's talk again after one or more family members or friends have strange immune deficiency diseases or your child is infertile and has major different diseases.

Yeah - they could kill a lot via this crap since so many believe in it now.

I would be relaxed over population growth - all models show that we would peak around 9 bio. and then fall to possibly 7 or far less in the next centuries. If you want to lower population, then focusing on the development of Africa would be the fastest way. Even the partiarchal wealthy gulf states have birth rates barely at maintenance level. We might not even reach 9 bio. if that was done. But whatever - let's go with the enslavement, poverty and vaccines.
Africa is not as densely populated as many might think.
For comparison, the figures from Africa, USA and EU.

Africa:
Population 1,275,920,972
Population density 36.4/km2 (94/sq mi)

USA:
Population 2019 estimate 328,239,523
Density 87/sq mi (33.6/km2)

EU:
Population 2020 estimate 447,206,135
Density 106/km2 (274.5/sq mi)
 

kel

Kingfisher
Averaged over the whole land area, no, but it's increasingly urbanized, and the worst kind of urbanism. Spreading the population out (in general, not just in Africa) seems like a valid goal to me - making it so that people needn't confine themselves to prison cities to get by. But, that's not a good goal for everybody.
 
Top