Corporations leave the west at an amazing pace. Atleast there hiring does...

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
Precisely. Each company outdid the other not only to increase capacity, but to reduce costs. In 1990, there were over 30 disk drive companies: many of these made disk drives in the US. Today there are but a handful left. Four are US companies. (One an IBM/Hitachi JV.) Three are Japanese (including Hitachi) and one Korean. Seven in total. None make disk drives in the US.

Korean? I am not aware that Samsung makes HDDs. Or is that somebody else?

Originally posted by Ned
Singapore indeed is a prime location for disk drive manufacturing. However, so is Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and China.

While that's true, my point is the reduction is manufacturing costs did not come primarily from moving to offshore locations but the improvements in manufacturing processes.

Perhaps for things such as HDDs the transportation costs become significant? If Dell and Compaq make their computers in Singapore in Malaysia, it makes sense to build the HDDs somewhere nearby.

[faded glory]

Bah, someone has to build and service the machines? Right?

IM NOT OBSELETE

Im not outta order! Your outta order! The whole freakin system is outta order! You want the truth? You want the truth!? YOU CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH! CAUSE ONCE YOU STICK YOUR HAND INTO A PILE OF GOO! THAT WAS YOUR BEST FRIENDS FACE! FORGET MAN, ITS CHINATOWN!

[Ned]

So, Che, what do you propose to do about low labor rates and lax environmental laws in the third world? Boycott their products?

If you try to tell a US company that he cannot use foreign labor or manufacturing, his offshore competitor will kill him.

If you boycott products produced with low wages and lax environmental laws, you are boycotting the third world (or even, the second world). This is why I suggest that the anti-globalization movement is the enemy of the third world.

With enough time and investment, these countries standards of living will increase enough that they can afford better rules on work conditions and on the environment. Until then, they are trying to attract capital and jobs, not scare them off.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Ned
This is nothing more than the invisible hand that Adam Smith described two hundred years ago.

Adam Smith should not be misrepresented in that way. You have to realize that he was arguing against the practice of Mercantilism. Most of the pro-globalism posters here on this thread have readily admited that the only countries who have been successfull in the global economy have used Mercantilism to do so. Also, and even more relevent, is that Adam Smith did not figure that wages would be different according to region. The simple fact that wages are different shows us that the there is no perfect competition and that none of the other ridiculous assumptions that his followers make are usefull.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Bah, someone has to build and service the machines? Right?

That's what robots are for.

Most of the pro-globalism posters here on this thread have readily admited that the only countries who have been successfull in the global economy have used Mercantilism to do so.

I see the opposite. It seems the anti-globalization have advocated mercantalist policies of hording wealth by closing off economic borders (like tariffs were unknown in mercantilist states).

Also, and even more relevent, is that Adam Smith did not figure that wages would be different according to region.

That's ridiculous. Supply and Demand shows anyone that wages will be different according to the supply of labor in a region. You are seriously misrepresenting Adam Smith while trying to be an authority for him.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Ned - What a great response. I didn't think you had it in you. .

[Ned]

Urban Ranger, I am sure that most desktop disk drives have one or two platters. Some 200 gigabyte monsters may have more disks. High end performance drives (servers and up) typically have more disks, but reduce their size to reduce their stroke for performance.

So we are comparing apples with apples to compare yesteryear's desktop drive with today's. The changes in component physics improves their capacity. But the lower costs are due to lower labor costs - including robotics - and lower enviromental and tax costs.

Assuming that a disk drive could completely be build by robots, would it be built in the US? The answer still is no - partly, of course, because the computer companies have moved offshore as well. But mostly due to environmental laws and taxes.

[faded glory]

"That's what robots are for."

Cant tell if your being sarcastic or not. But if machines produce machines, and if AI evolves ever more. Arent we setting ourselves up for Skynet, Matrix, Twilight Zone. I was always wanted to run around LA with a bunch of playboy bunny's blasting terminaters with lasers...ever since I saw T2..

Will the machines control the future?

[Ned]

Yes, Samsung makes disk drives.

[Ned]

Originally posted by faded glory
I
Besides. I have to agree with Che here. These corporations gain unimaginable influence oversea's, hold down labor movements, and pollute alot. Saw a special not to long ago that had mountains of computer parts in China. Dangerous, extremely dangerous. Kids playing near Capacitors from motherboards, Sharp gold plate cards, Moniters. It was pretty disgusting, IMO. It was a generic producer of components for PC's that supplied US vendors. The workers lived in a shanty town nearby.

It really is up to the governments of these countries to clean up pollution. China is beginning to do in Peking because the Olymipics are coming.

As to holding down labor unions - why in the world would a worker join a labor union when he is making a "princely" sum? When the economies of these countries improve enough so that export-related salaries are competitive with local salaries, then unions might make sense. Until then, what is the point?

However, reports from that communist paradise Vietnam about child slave labor are disturbing. But, this is Vietnam, after all. A real communist workers paradise. If they complain, they are sent to re-education camps or better, simply shot, just as Che suggested. Why any company would open a factory in such an extremist communist country is beyond me.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

High risk, High gain.

They may also get a sweetheart deal and become protected in that country.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


That's ridiculous. Supply and Demand shows anyone that wages will be different according to the supply of labor in a region. You are seriously misrepresenting Adam Smith while trying to be an authority for him.

Another ridiculous assumption that the followers of Adam Smith make is that resources are prefectly mobile. And that is why they assume that prices and wages are the same everywhere. If resources were mobile there would be no shortages or surpluses. Come on Imran, don't you know what market equilibrium is?

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by DuncanK
Adam Smith should not be misrepresented in that way. You have to realize that he was arguing against the practice of Mercantilism. Most of the pro-globalism posters here on this thread have readily admited that the only countries who have been successfull in the global economy have used Mercantilism to do so. Also, and even more relevent, is that Adam Smith did not figure that wages would be different according to region. The simple fact that wages are different shows us that the there is no perfect competition and that none of the other ridiculous assumptions that his followers make are usefull.

edit: Another ridiculous assumption that the followers of Adam Smith make is that resources are prefectly mobile. (cross posted)

Nope, sorry. Smith argued that Britain would gain from free trade even if other countries practiced mercantilism. The fact that wages differ does not show us that there is no perfect competition. Rather, it indicates that the productivity of labor differs across regions, or that there is some fixed factor of production (local labor, natural resources) which does not move between regions. But the factors themselves do not have to move in order to have gains from trade. Instead, countries can trade the goods which embody those factors. This result, known as the Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem, shows that gains from trade exist regardless of short-run fixities. Swedish economist Bertil Ohlin won the Nobel Prize in Economics in part for this work.

[Ramo]

Oh sure.

Ramo, so long as money can move from one country to another, there is simply nothing you can do about businesses setting up in low cost areas.

Huh?

Anti-globalists truely are the enemy of the third world. While the capitalists bring investment, infrastructure and jobs, the anti-globalists bring lawsuits designed to keep the third world in - a third world state.

There is also the matter of politics.

The only third world countries that are benefiting from globalization are capitalist countries. Those that are run by dictators or communists (other than China) remain in the backwater of history.

You clearly do not understand what the anti-globalization movement is about. I consider myself militantly pro-free trade, for instance, but I also consider myself to be a member of the anti-globalization movement.

We are advocates against protectionism, in general, particularly protectionism on the part of developed states. It's just that we see things like people being murdered because they they're uppity enough to organize against their employers bad.

Honestly, I don't know why we allow ourselves to be branded as anti-globalizationists, as we are the ones who are fighting for freedom and justice in the world.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Nope, sorry. Smith argued that Britain would gain from free trade even if other countries practiced mercantilism.

And I never disputed that. It's amazing how people will argue a point that you haven't made.

Originally posted by Adam Smith
The fact that wages differ does not show us that there is no perfect competition.

It shows us that resources are not mobile and therefore perfect competition can not exist. btw, are you arguing the perfect competition actually exists?

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Rather, it indicates that the productivity of labor differs across regions

Are you saying that Smith believed that people in certain regions were harder or smarter workers and that is why wages will be different in in different regions. This is blowing my mind. None of this is relevent. Even if people were better workers in certain regions. Assuming there were no barriers to trade what would stop the bad workers from moving to where the higher wages are?