Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That doesn't mean that the supply shouldn't be regulated.

I actually think the article is wrong. I don't think large corporations give a rat's ass what many shareholders think either. The only "Shareholders" that they care about are the ones that are CEOs and on the Board.

Therefore, when we talk about a "Corporation" we are really only talking about extensions of the Board and Top executives. Everyone else is simply acting out the wishes and direction these guys provide. Such is the nature of hierarchy.

Melissia wrote:That doesn't mean that the supply shouldn't be regulated.

This is a silly non-statement unless you can actually put specific actionable steps behind it.

Let's take Apple as an example. Outsourced labor, very well compensated CEOs, is absolutely crushing its competitor Research in Motion (the maker of Blackberry), commands ridiculously huge gross margins on its product line, and is sitting on enough cash to buy a modestly sized nation.

Let me know how you intend to regulate this 'broken' social model.

sourclams wrote:This is a silly non-statement unless you can actually put specific actionable steps behind it

.I can.

Outlawing the sale of products produced by slave labor is a good example.

That's another stupid non-statement. Apple's Chinese employees aren't slaves in any sense of the word.

Even if we were to use your 'definition', you would advocate simply banning Apple products from sale within the US?

200% tariff on goods and services not manufactured in the USA and its territories. That will be the new US standard for favored trading partners under the WTO and GATT.

sourclams wrote:
Which further degrades the argument that top-down approaches like this social engineering of the marketplace are even needed, let alone whether or not they work.

If there is demand, somebody creates supply.

Well the marketplace, by its nature, is socially engineered. I always wonder why that phrase is treated as a pejorative, its like people think they, collectively as society, have no impact on the world and each other, its weird.

Additionally, that supply and demand argument also applies to governance, "social engineering", and the like. Makes things more complicated, and therefore more fun.

sourclams wrote:That's another stupid non-statement. Apple's Chinese employees aren't slaves in any sense of the word.

They certainly face significant negative repercussions if they stop working at Foxconn.

They aren't slaves though, just critically dependent on their employers that regulates the majority of their lives in a manner reminiscent of coal towns which, last I checked, are widely considered this novel concept we call "bad".

dogma wrote:I always wonder why that phrase is treated as a pejorative

Because in this context, where recently it has been most applicable, it's typically some sort of top-down reform targeted at making the market less like it currently is in order to make it more like someone's reality-test-failing ideal.

Wal-mart vs Main Street
Melissia's "regulation" of Apple
Obamacare vs Supreme Court (although this one isn't yet resolved)

These broad-brush appeals to "morality" are the market-centric equivalent of running to Mom because someone was mean to you.

They aren't slaves though, just critically dependent on their employers that regulates the majority of their lives in a manner reminiscent of coal towns which, last I checked, are widely considered this novel concept we call "bad".

And according to Apple consumer behavior, they don't give a gak.

sourclams wrote:
These broad-brush appeals to "morality" are the market-centric equivalent of running to Mom because someone was mean to you.

So is any appeal to justice. Once you get past Hobbes, everyone tacitly acknowledges that society matters, and society necessarily engineers itself, top down and otherwise.

sourclams wrote:
And according to Apple consumer behavior, they don't give a gak.

Well, their consumers don't, but I imagine Foxconn employees would prefer a better deal.

Capitalism basically entails gaking on some people, trying to rationalize it away doesn't change that fact.

dogma wrote:
Well, their consumers don't, but I imagine Foxconn employees would prefer a better deal.

We all would, but thats the best deal they can get in that location with their skills. if they could they would be somewhere else and the terms of employment would have to change or the plant would shut down. The joys of enlightened self interest.

I take it then you strongly approve of maquiladora employees upping sticks to infiltrate the southern US and get themselves better lives.

Frazzled wrote:We all would, but thats the best deal they can get in that location with their skills. if they could they would be somewhere else and the terms of employment would have to change or the plant would shut down. The joys of enlightened self interest.

Which is why capitalism entails gaking on some people.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:We all would, but thats the best deal they can get in that location with their skills. if they could they would be somewhere else and the terms of employment would have to change or the plant would shut down. The joys of enlightened self interest.

Which is why capitalism entails gaking on some people.

Or alternatively giving them greater opportunities than they had before. Its not "gakking" on them if its better than what they could get before. Or they could just stay at their 1965 standard of living. yes, I am sure they would prefer that vs. "being gakked on" and making a lot more money. Quick someone get them their little red book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:I take it then you strongly approve of maquiladora employees upping sticks to infiltrate the southern US and get themselves better lives.

I understand everything except for "upping sticks." Que?

Frazzled wrote:
Or alternatively giving them greater opportunities than they had before.

I don't know, if you listen to Hobbes everyone had the opportunity to kill others and take their stuff, free of consequences. Sounds pretty awesome to me.

Frazzled wrote:
Its not "gakking" on them if its better than what they could get before. Or they could just stay at their 1965 standard of living. yes, I am sure they would prefer that vs. "being gakked on" and making a lot more money.

Sure it is. If I throw my slave better table scraps because I'm better off, he's still my slave and I'm still throwing him table scraps. Now, no one in any capitalist country is a slave (well, very few people are), and they don't eat table scraps, but pretending that making people slightly better off necessarily conflicts with not gaking on them is nonsense.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying capitalism is bad, I'm just appraising what it entails without any moral bias. I'm not averse to considering myself a horrible person.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Or alternatively giving them greater opportunities than they had before.

I don't know, if you listen to Hobbes everyone had the opportunity to kill others and take their stuff, free of consequences. Sounds pretty awesome to me.

Frazzled wrote:
Its not "gakking" on them if its better than what they could get before. Or they could just stay at their 1965 standard of living. yes, I am sure they would prefer that vs. "being gakked on" and making a lot more money.

Sure it is. If I throw my slave better table scraps because I'm better off, he's still my slave and I'm still throwing him table scraps. Now, no one in any capitalist country is a slave (well, very few people are), and they don't eat table scraps, but pretending that making people slightly better off necessarily conflicts with not gaking on them is nonsense.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying capitalism is bad, I'm just appraising what it entails without any moral bias. I'm not averse to considering myself a horrible person.

Morality doesn't play a part. Its simple math. If they pay enough of X to get the people they need then good for them and good for the people they hired. the people they hired cannot getter wages than that, else they would do so. if the employer pays more than they need to then generally they will get better quality employees (better production is a separate topic) but those costs then go into higher product costs.

Put it another way. If the manufacturer paid them $200 an hour, they could do so, but they would quickly go bankrupt as competitors stomped them like a bad habit and those employees would have no jobs.

Now Frazzled is ok with forcing Apple to pay its employees high wages. Then the benefit of manufacturing overseas becomes negative and those positions are returned to the US.

Frazzled wrote:
Morality doesn't play a part. Its simple math. If they pay enough of X to get the people they need then good for them and good for the people they hired. the people they hired cannot getter wages than that, else they would do so. if the employer pays more than they need to then generally they will get better quality employees (better production is a separate topic) but those costs then go into higher product costs.

Of course morality plays a part, it pretty much has to if you're going to use the word "good" relative to people and their circumstances. Keep in mind I say this as a self-admonished amoral ass.

Frazzled wrote:
Put it another way. If the manufacturer paid them $200 an hour, they could do so, but they would quickly go bankrupt as competitors stomped them like a bad habit and those employees would have no jobs.

Now Frazzled is ok with forcing Apple to pay its employees high wages. Then the benefit of manufacturing overseas becomes negative and those positions are returned to the US.

Tragically we live in an employer dominated society, and have for centuries. Which, ultimately, brings into question why so many people seem to hate government, but seem to love being in am employer dominated society*.


*Not an endorsement of communism.

People don't understand that as the economic market grows it is necessary for the government to grow as well (though not at the same pace).

They further go on to assume that any support for government growth is communism...and to be honest, I don't see any developed Western capitalist country suddenly devolving into a communist state...

Frazzled wrote: The joys of enlightened self interest.

The most powerful force in the universe.

After it, the nuclear weak and strong forces pale into insignificance.

chromedog wrote:

Frazzled wrote: The joys of enlightened self interest.

The most powerful force in the universe.

After it, the nuclear weak and strong forces pale into insignificance.

Never underestimate the other guy's GREED!
-drug dealer offed by Scarface. He underestimated his greed.

Apathy is the strongest force.

I love all the rationalizations humanity has come up with to be horrible to other humans. Let's all just admit it.

The name of the game is exploitation, and I'm okay with that. I prefer to approach the fact with open eyes. I exploit people, and in return they exploit me. It's okay, it's called life.

Do you think Chimps spend as much time trying to rationalize their behavior, or do they just go out and do it?

Easy E wrote:I love all the rationalizations humanity has come up with to be horrible to other humans. Let's all just admit it.

The name of the game is exploitation, and I'm okay with that. I prefer to approach the fact with open eyes. I exploit people, and in return they exploit me. It's okay, it's called life.

Do you think Chimps spend as much time trying to rationalize their behavior, or do they just go out and do it?

I admit it.

Easy E wrote:I love all the rationalizations humanity has come up with to be horrible to other humans. Let's all just admit it.

The name of the game is exploitation, and I'm okay with that. I prefer to approach the fact with open eyes. I exploit people, and in return they exploit me. It's okay, it's called life.

Do you think Chimps spend as much time trying to rationalize their behavior, or do they just go out and do it?

Let me guess, you support communism?

Amaya wrote:

Easy E wrote:I love all the rationalizations humanity has come up with to be horrible to other humans. Let's all just admit it.

The name of the game is exploitation, and I'm okay with that. I prefer to approach the fact with open eyes. I exploit people, and in return they exploit me. It's okay, it's called life.

Do you think Chimps spend as much time trying to rationalize their behavior, or do they just go out and do it?

Let me guess, you support communism?

Some animals are more equal than others. . .

Which is why communism is inherently due to failure.

Communism is so over.

In the 21st century, Chaos is begin to grow.

That was well executed.

Frazzled wrote:
We all would, but thats the best deal they can get in that location with their skills. if they could they would be somewhere else and the terms of employment would have to change or the plant would shut down. The joys of enlightened self interest.

But they can't. The term "wage slave" comes to mind.

Other than that: Stakeholders. Staekholders. Steakholders. Mmmmm. Steak. Think I'll have one for dinner tomorrow.

Amaya wrote:

Easy E wrote:I love all the rationalizations humanity has come up with to be horrible to other humans. Let's all just admit it.

The name of the game is exploitation, and I'm okay with that. I prefer to approach the fact with open eyes. I exploit people, and in return they exploit me. It's okay, it's called life.

Do you think Chimps spend as much time trying to rationalize their behavior, or do they just go out and do it?

Let me guess, you support communism?

You caught me McCarthy.

If you think capitalism is simply exploitation you're woefully ignorant. There are those who exploit it, just as there are those who exploit communism for their own gain.

Human nature doesn't change simply because the market does.