The global shift.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2013, 09:41 AM
The global shift.
Ill keep it simple.

We (the west) for a long time used to manufacture our own products. As time has progressed and to build more profit we have begun to rely heavily on imports from the East (parts, labour etc) and also companies have outsourced a lot of work over there.

So we have been sending a lot of "wealth" over to these countries, we have been injecting money into these countries and their economies have grown because of it.

So because we have provided a lot of manufacturing and services over to these other countries, without actually building up any of our own, is the balance of "power" shifting over to the East?

With Chinas Economy due to overtake that of America, do we run the risk of slowly becoming third world countries ourselves (over the next 30-50 years)

Thoughts?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 09:56 AM
RE: The global shift.
... and this is a problem because?

Actually, this is a problem for us in the East... you fuckers are becoming too poor to buy our stuff!


In my early twenties, when I was squatting with a bunch of S.Africans, Canadians, Aussies etc. in some Parisian hole, drinking wine so cheap that you got more than the purchase price back when you returned the empty bottle and experimenting with whatever substances ... you get the picture... we collectively decided that China would be the world's numero uno economy within twenty years.

Obviously we were slightly out there as that would have been around 10 years ago.

I feel much more confident now in making the same prediction again.

Start downloading your Mandarin lessons now.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:10 AM
RE: The global shift.
Its not a problem to Eastern countries because they are gaining something from it. It becomes a problem to the West though because in the quest to gain profit, we have in fact sold ourselves out for the long term.

I understand that it is kind of 50/50 relationship, that we rely on them as much as they rely on us. However if this continues and we keep outsourcing rather than investing in home based manufacturing/services then our reliance will just keep growing and growing.

We need to keep trade open of course, yet we also need to invest heavily into our own countries.... or I believe we will face a lot of trouble.

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
12-01-2013, 10:23 AM
RE: The global shift.
Thing One:
Who are "We"? The western countries did nothing you describe; nor did the populations. Western governments obeyed the orders of their highest-priced lobbyists. Western corporate boards did what they mindlessly do: steered their titanic organizations in the direction of maximum quarterly profit.

Thing Two:
The eastern nations that attracted such development capital are not necessarily the better for it. Indeed, following the disastrous western monetary-industrial model has already cause massive problems for India and China, and will cause a great deal more, unless they wake up and change course very, very fast.

To ponder:
How beneficial is industrialization?
How accurate has been the forecasting of economists?
Might there be some other, mor3e sustainable model upon which to base production, distribution, consumption, social services and human communities?

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:36 AM
RE: The global shift.
It's already too late. The West is pretty much dependant on goods manufactured in the Far East. However China's internal market is growing to such an extent that soon they will no longer be dependant on us purchasing what they make; the Asian market will become self sufficient.

Western countries might not become the new "third world" over 50 years, but we'll certainly be more like "second". We're killing ourselves through decadence and an inflated opinion of our self-worth !

More seriously, DLJ is right, the Chinese are way less stupid than most give them credit and will certainly be the dominant economy in the near future. In some ways they already are, maybe not in per capita GDP, but considering the value of our debt that they own, and their enourmous trade surplus, they are certainly in a much more comfortable position than the US and Europe.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 07:08 PM
RE: The global shift.
Besides, none of this will matter, once climate change really starts ruffling the continents.

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 07:13 PM
RE: The global shift.
Agenda 21

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 07:14 PM
RE: The global shift.
(12-01-2013 07:08 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  Besides, none of this will matter, once climate change really starts ruffling the continents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangent

...you just took one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: The global shift.
Yea of course.

BRIC countries they're called. Brazil, Russia, India and China. It'll be the first time in human history that "third world" countries will the worlds super power.

From an economics point of view it's not bad at all. Being able to ship our products around the world (and the manufacturing of those products) is what has allowed the rapid growth that has occurred in the last 100 years or so.
It's about efficiency of resources.

Over time (centuries) I think what you will see is an overall equilibrium of power as who produces what is leveled out. Like what I mean is right now China produces things cheap because of poor human rights, but over time this will change and China's humans rights will expand and so it wont become cheaper to produce in China any more. With the internet and technology today I think you will also find that it wont become.. technologically superior.. to produce in some country over another etc... So you might bring back car production to US for example, but they'll be Japanese designs etc...
Basically a sort of disappearance of boarders. Not in a literal sense but in a cultural sense.

Put it this way, instead of thinking 200 whatever countries, the world would reflect more of just one big ass country. I think globalization has made us destined to head down that route. I don't mean in a communist sense either, I think capitalism has to be the main thing to get us there.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like earmuffs's post
13-07-2013, 01:45 PM
RE: The global shift.
(12-01-2013 09:41 AM)bemore Wrote:  Ill keep it simple.

We (the west) for a long time used to manufacture our own products. As time has progressed and to build more profit we have begun to rely heavily on imports from the East (parts, labour etc) and also companies have outsourced a lot of work over there.

So we have been sending a lot of "wealth" over to these countries, we have been injecting money into these countries and their economies have grown because of it.

So because we have provided a lot of manufacturing and services over to these other countries, without actually building up any of our own, is the balance of "power" shifting over to the East?

With Chinas Economy due to overtake that of America, do we run the risk of slowly becoming third world countries ourselves (over the next 30-50 years)

Thoughts?

This post is based on the premise that in order for someone to gain, someone has to lose. This might be true of piracy and raiding and banditry, but it is not true of trade or capitalism.

The error of your reasoning here should be obvious. Has China become richer in recent decades? Yes. Has the Western world become poorer? No. It was the same fear when Japan rose as an economic power after WW2, and as unfounded and baseless.

Other posters in this thread seem to consider it bad that the West become "dependent" on manufacturing in the East. Why is it bad? Trade is always good for those involved, or else they wouldn't trade. Autarky is a very, very bad idea. The idea of self-sufficienvy is delusional and will only allow for a subsistence life.

"Examine the religious principles, which have, in fact, prevailed in the world. You will scarcely be persuaded, that they are any thing but sick men's dreams." - David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: