Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China and "our standard of living"

fakesteve.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#71

Post by zimbabwe »

thwarted wrote: post #52
zimbabwe wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an argument that has quite a bit of nuance to it. I'd argue that the iPhone is a luxury item for certain definitions of luxury, that in fact it is more luxurious than something like a diamond necklace if you use a utilitarian definition of luxury.

For definitions of luxury where luxury equals utilitarian? This seems counterintuitive, can you give a better example? (not that I disagree).

I guess what I was trying to say is that it depends on what you mean by luxury. I always viewed luxury as whatever took some annoyance off my mind, so having a phone/mp3 player/camera/clock/gaming combo that syncs quickly is a luxury to me. I also really like pretty things that act very responsive, which I consider a luxury since that's not strictly a part of usability.

Keep in mind that I won't even wear a watch because I don't like dangly things, so I won't even pretend to understand what sorts of people go for the typical sorts of luxury item.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#72

Post by zimbabwe »

mrshoe wrote: post #67
zimbabwe wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it zero sum? I'd make you a bet that right now, more people are living happily than ever did in the past. The bar constantly rises.

Let me expand upon my one line explanation. I apologize for being terse last time. Let's say the stock market increases at 10% per year. This growth is driven by more capital being invested in the market each year. That means everyone in the market earns 10% interest every year, right? Well, in reality, that's not the case. Some people earn 30% and some people lose 20%. In fact, if anyone earns over 10%, that means t…

That makes sense. Thanks for qualifying!

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#73

Post by timr »

ido wrote: post #65
timr wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small problem with this logic: twenty-two years ago was 1987. It's not as if we weren't importing cheap crap from China by the truckload in the 1980s. If you want to make a valid comparison, the "good old days", for the purposes of this question, are probably before the 1960s. I'm not saying that there isn't some confirmation bias going on in the OP, but it's wrong to say that products were bad in 1987, and that ther…

> It's not as if we weren't importing cheap crap from China by the truckload in the 1980s. It was a lot less so than it is today. My parents had a textile factory till the mid 90's - and that was still a relatively thriving industry at the 80's - as were a lot of other types of manufacturing. For example, a lot of computers were made in western countries where as today there is probably not much in your computer that…

"It was a lot less so than it is today."

So? That doesn't make the argument any less fallacious. Maybe products are a lot worse today than they were in 1989.

My point is that there's no clear and necessary reason that a comparison of 1987 product quality to 2009 product quality is a valid counterargument to the OP's assertion. The only way it works is if you intend to argue that product quality has risen (or at least stayed constant), while the percentage produced domestically has fallen. And if you're trying to argue that point, you've got to provide some evidence (something more than a quote from Spaceballs, anyway), or you're just begging the question.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#74

Post by Devilboy »

neilk wrote: post #51
biohacker42 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well not quite spot on. It did mention that these people were willing to do what ever to get away from the hellish alternative they were born into. But if you blinked you missed it, you missed the most important point: People are doing this voluntarily. Rumors of forced labor are greatly exaggerated. Perhaps somewhere in Burma but in China and India and other places, people do this hard work because the alternative i…

If you saw a drowning person, would you ask them to be your slave forever in exchange for throwing them a life preserver? That's a voluntary exchange too, but you're still a dick for doing it. Yes, most of these jobs are better than the alternative, namely, starvation in the countryside where there are no jobs. In the worst cases, (not all) these jobs pay so little that the workers can't accumulate capital, can't sen…

If you saw a drowning person, would you ask them to be your slave forever in exchange for throwing them a life preserver?

Not the same thing at all. To make this analogy work the choice would be 1) LET THE PERSON DROWN. 2) Help him by letting him work for you until the next ship comes around.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#75

Post by AlisdairO »

reedlaw wrote: post #58
neilk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of does, when you consider that we're forcing local workers to compete with people who are just desperate to get out of the same crappy apartment with 12 other relatives. Do I owe the local worker a living? Of course not. But we both pay taxes to the same government, and he is getting shafted due to China's MFN status, and I as a professional who can afford iPhones am getting an awesome deal.

Competition is driving down prices. Tariffs and minimum wage laws are just ways of redistributing wealth. If there were no tariffs or minimum wage laws, there would be more healthy competition which would raise the world's standard of living, not just local workers.

...or it would simply intensify the race to the bottom.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#76

Post by iamelgringo »

potatolicious wrote: post #64
neilk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you saw a drowning person, would you ask them to be your slave forever in exchange for throwing them a life preserver? That's a voluntary exchange too, but you're still a dick for doing it. Yes, most of these jobs are better than the alternative, namely, starvation in the countryside where there are no jobs. In the worst cases, (not all) these jobs pay so little that the workers can't accumulate capital, can't sen…

Modern, first-world standards cannot be applied to the third world - I am a prime example of this. I owe my life to child labor and sweatshop labor, allow me to explain. My family is originally from Taiwan, and both of my folks grew up when Taiwan was still an inconsequential tropical island consisted mostly of fishing villages and a hodgepodge government-in-exile. Both of them are beneficiaries of the "abusive" prac…

Modern, first-world standards cannot be applied to the third world...

That's part of the problem, though, isn't it? The tremendous migration of manufacturing jobs to third world countries has been in large part because they are not limited to a 40 hour work week and first world safety standards. Of course it's cheaper to manufacture in China, their regulations are a lot more lax than ours, although that may be changing.

I, too grew up in a Third World country. My parents were missionaries in Central America in the 80's. I grew up playing soccer with children who's bellies were bloated from parasites and could not afford shoes.

I've worked in communities that were essentially indentured servants to the tomato packing industry. The tomato company owned the housing, ran the schools, provided plumbing, etc.. to their workers. The employees were willing to put up with indentured servitude, because on a certain level because it was better than starving. It was better for their children to get a 6th grade education and then go off to pick tomatoes than to have no education at all.

Why did that happen? So we can have tomatoes at our local grocery store for $1 a pound.

I agree that it is better for the people in the third world to have jobs rather than not have jobs, but I'm pretty conflicted about the entire situation. Starving children, vs children working 16 hours a day in a tomato field? That's not a good choice to have to make.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#77

Post by Tichy »

neilk wrote: post #48
garply wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for making this point. This happens to be the position on the economic ladder where these people are. A few people are higher, most people are at a level equal or lower to this. In some ways I feel like the tone pieces like this take when discussing Chinese life is condescending. For some people this is just 'work.' Consider using this kind of pity to talk about American blue collar workers - does it seem a…

It kind of does, when you consider that we're forcing local workers to compete with people who are just desperate to get out of the same crappy apartment with 12 other relatives. Do I owe the local worker a living? Of course not. But we both pay taxes to the same government, and he is getting shafted due to China's MFN status, and I as a professional who can afford iPhones am getting an awesome deal.

How do you mean "we are forcing"? I don't think "we" create the economic realities. We don't live in paradise where we just have to lie in the shadow of a tree all day and only occasionally have to reach up to grab an apple. Life isn't easy.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#78

Post by Tichy »

iamelgringo wrote: post #76
potatolicious wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern, first-world standards cannot be applied to the third world - I am a prime example of this. I owe my life to child labor and sweatshop labor, allow me to explain. My family is originally from Taiwan, and both of my folks grew up when Taiwan was still an inconsequential tropical island consisted mostly of fishing villages and a hodgepodge government-in-exile. Both of them are beneficiaries of the "abusive" prac…

Modern, first-world standards cannot be applied to the third world... That's part of the problem, though, isn't it? The tremendous migration of manufacturing jobs to third world countries has been in large part because they are not limited to a 40 hour work week and first world safety standards. Of course it's cheaper to manufacture in China, their regulations are a lot more lax than ours, although that may be changi…

It certainly is not all clear cut to decide, but I tend to think that competition is the only way to solve these things. If the economy where stronger in 3rd world countries, there would be more competition for workers. Therefore the companies hiring would have to offer better conditions to keep the workers.

I guess that is assuming an open market, too. It does not quite apply to dictatorships and slavery. Unless you count "flee to a neighboring country" as an option, which it probably isn't in most cases.

Edit: I guess even slavery does not completely invalidate the concept. If demand was high enough, prices for slaves would rise. Eventually it would be high enough for slave owners to sell, and effectively the new owners would have to offer freedom as a price.

Also neighboring countries would be willing to accept refugees if they had a high demand for labor.

Re: China and "our standard of living"

#80

Post by onreact-com »

jeffesp wrote: post #7
mistermann wrote: post #3

Wow, spot on! Likely not news to anyone here, but I really wonder how many people out there are smart enough to realize how amazingly cheap the stuff we buy is, and really think of where it comes from.

And I wonder how many of those that realize are willing to change their lifestyle based on that knowledge? To be honest, I am not doing my part.

I try. I support fair trade wherever I can. Mostly groceries but there is fashion as well and I hope soon more tech products will be available in the near future.
Post reply on HN