Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Tech Manufacturers With Better Labor Practices?

First time accepted submitter srs5694 writes "In light of the recent flood of stories about abysmal labor practices at Foxconn and other Chinese factories that produce most of the tech products we consume, the question arises: Who makes motherboards, plug-in cards, cell phones, and other devices WITHOUT relying on labor practices that are just one rung above slave labor? If I want to buy a new tech gadget, from whom can I buy it without ethical qualms?"

38 of 375 comments (clear)

  1. Really? by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Probably no one these days. Either components, or parts are made in china in some form or another. Even down to the base layer PCB. Though it's getting even worse than that, China is getting too "expensive" to operate in. And they're moving out to other 3rd world countries.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
    1. Re:Really? by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think the larger question is, does.much of anyone in the first world even really give it a second thought?

      Isn't this the.price they pay for.taking these.jobs.from us where it used to be done for a.living wage and fair.working conditions?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Really? by Cruciform · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a little naive. Fair living wages and working conditions are fairly recent. Don't you follow history?
      Business moved where business could continue to work as it has for time immemorial.

    3. Re:Really? by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Informative

      Quite true. In fact, most people don't know that Europe started to mass-export their industry to North America in early 1800's, and literally built their society on the backs of children here. And they did so right up until the 1930's give or take a little bit. Though if you look further back, companies were exporting their industry as soon as people started landing here and started setting up shop. Hell, England was buying wagon wheels made in Canada, made by children, paid by levy in 1750.

      Though let's not forget, it was this flagrant abuse that forced us. To say enough was enough, and ensure there were working standards, end child slaveshops and all the rest too. Though it went on for a long time before anything changed.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Really? by actionbastard · · Score: 5, Informative

      It goes a lot deeper than just the components. It goes down to the minerals and metals that make up those components:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan#Ethics_of_Coltan_mining_in_the_Democratic_Republic_of_Congo

      http://sitemaker.umich.edu/section002group3/coltan_mining_in_democratic_republic_of_the_congo

      Apple gets the spotlight thrown on it because of its popular following. But every company that makes anything electronic or that contains electronic components is just as culpable.

      --
      Sig this!
    5. Re:Really? by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it really bothers the poster that much, simply go without the toy.

      Well, obviously it doesn't bother you, but it does bother me.

      And I have no problem going without the latest pocket-sized Facebook/Google/AngryBirds appliance. The hard part is going without shoes.

      I'm not rich, but I have no objection to paying a little extra for stuff that's not made by indentured servants. But most of the time I don't even get that choice.

    6. Re:Really? by afabbro · · Score: 4, Informative

      The hard part is going without shoes.

      Low-tech goods can still be found "made in the USA" (assuming you're in the USA, but probably true elsewhere). A Google, for example, turned up this site for shoes. There are lots of things where, if you're willing to pay more and take a more traditional approach (e.g., leather instead of high-tech fabrics), you can buy local. For example, it is easy to buy all your furniture from a local craftsman/woodworker - but the price will not even be remotely like what you'd find at Wal-mart.

      On the other hand, for most if not all high-tech consumer goods, there simply is no other choice.

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    7. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is a game about this, they show how every step of the process is horrible. You can get it on http://www.phonestory.org/, they have both Android and iPhone versions (you can't get the iPhone version anymore as Apple banned it for, amongst other reasons "15.2 Apps that depict violence or abuse of children will be rejected "). Also, no it isn't ironic that it's made for disposable phones as that's exactly the public they want to reach.

    8. Re:Really? by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Though let's not forget, it was this flagrant abuse that forced us. To say enough was enough, and ensure there were working standards, end child slaveshops and all the rest too. Though it went on for a long time before anything changed.

      Let's not forget to give the unions credit for ending the abusives labor practices of the last century.

      Without continuously enforcing the labor laws we have, businesses would go back to their old ways in a heartbeat
      because there is always someone willing to take your place for longer hours and less pay.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    9. Re:Really? by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It goes a lot deeper than just the components. It goes down to the minerals and metals that make up those components:

      The hard part though for raw materials like coltan is that stuff is recycled a LOT. A lot is mined, but these days, a lot is recycled.

      There's only like 11 smelters worldwide that handle coltan, and various industry groups have actually talked to those smelters to buy "conflict-free" minerals, which all have actually agreed too.

      That's good, as no new conflict minerals are entering the system (at least without someone going rogue or conflict minerals with forged paperwork). However, a complete ban isn't possible because an increasing amount comes from recycling, and there's no paperwork anymore. If you want to ban conflict minerals, basically the entire recycling chain must be thrown away because it's impossible to differentiate and the only way is to assume the entire chain is contaminated.

    10. Re:Really? by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So wait, you'd rather people in china go back to being subsistence farmers with a 44 year life expectancy (that was by the way, 1960), with no education, so you can feel good about giving extra money to your neighbour who's going to go out and spend more on lunch than someone in china would have made in a week? That's the argument against what is happening in china today.

      China is in transition. There is a huge swath of people, basically 3 or 4 lost generations of people, and another 1 or 2 in the pipeline who are the transition from destitute subsistence farmers who literally never had anything, to a society of people who have little things like antibiotics, and electricity. Unfortunately, they're lost. They're not savable by any laws rules, treaties or procedures. Nothing. And there are hundreds of millions of them, which makes them worth next to nothing. A million workers at foxconn go on strike? No problem, shut down the facility and move somewhere else, and hire a million others, or let foxconn go out of business and someone else will emerge. Because they have generations of people who have nothing else they can do but repetitive manual labour. Chinas literacy rate in 1950 was 20% (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/12/news/12iht-rchina.t.html?pagewanted=all) Today it's still only about 88%.

      Believe it or not, all these exploited workers in china are living the great dream. That their children and childrens children won't have to go through this. But they are condemned to lives of either being peasant farmers who could never read, write or get any actual health care, or being underpaid overworked factory workers. The only thing we can do for them is give them jobs, and we can only give them money based on the fact that they're basically doing the work of robots.

      Remember, there are still 2.7 billion people living on less than 2 dollars a day, and 1.1 billion on less than a dollar (worldwide). http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00282/over_world.htm . That's slightly out of date, but it conveys the point. Foxconn's wages are about 300 dollars a month, or about 10 dollars a day (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/business/global/08wages.html). Comparatively, people working at foxconn at 10 dollars a day, are doing *extremely* well compared to the lives they would have had 40 years earlier.

      In the west we don't really think about the cost of basic things. Workers at foxconn have access to a diverse diet, which, by the way, is actually pretty tough to get on 2 dollars a day. They have generally clean water, again, not something they would have had as starving peasants. Oh, and they aren't starving. They, and their children will be able to read and write. They have electricity, which again, is a pretty radical concept.

      The only way billions of *people* in the world are going to get out of illiterate starving and dying to preventable diseases, is if we give them jobs, preferably for honest work. That might be making your shoes, and that might be snapping together an iPod. But you can't just go and pay someone in china 10 dollars and hour for a job someone else will do for 2, it's has devastating cascading effect through society, and frankly, for 10 dollars an hour, it would be cheaper to pay a robot than a foxconn worker. They're better to get the 2 dollars an hour or 1.25 or whatever it is, than to get nothing. Because without money they can't build anything to improve their society with, which is why they (along with a lot of other places) are so far behind, and that china has realized this is why they're growing at a break neck rate and fixing it.

      As a grad student, I make about 20k a year (I'm sort of half game developer half grad student, but one is part of the other). I am, by canadian measures barely above the poverty line once you take out my tuition. That's still more money in 1 year that about half the people in the world will make in their lifetimes.

      Yes, china has unfair currency practices which (significantly) undervalue their currency, and

    11. Re:Really? by geogob · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Is it really that misguided? I wanted to mod you down, but on second thought your comment really is insightful... I just don't agree with it.

      If it really bothers the poster that much, simply go without the toy.

      What kind of logic is that? That goes in the same bucket as "If you don't like how it is, make it yourself"... It's also like saying if you are bothered by how animals are handled by *some* producers, why don't you become vegetarian.
      With food, just like with electronics devices, there are ways to consume while reducing your negative footprint. With food, it gets always easier to do so - no so much with electronics.

      ...simply go without the toy.

      Toys, really? I don't know how you live or what you do for a living, but there is no way I could work or live in 2012 without consuming electronic products.

      But it the end, I think what will happen here is the same thing as with what happens when people try to consume animals products only coming from animals treated in the best conditions... most are not ready to pay the price.

    12. Re:Really? by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No matter how many times you call it exploitation, that doesn't make it so. These people want a better life, which is why they work in factories. Just like Americans did. Just like the English did. Just like the Germans did. Just like the French did. Just like the Japanese did. Just like the Taiwanese did. Just like the Australians did. Just like the Canadians did.

      You are filthy rich in comparison to the rest of the world, but you are so spoiled that you don't even know it. The Chinese people cannot have your life until their country is comparatively rich. Their country cannot become comparatively rich until the majority of the population is involved in wealth creation. Thats a straight up fact and no matter how many times you claim bullshit like "exploitation", you cannot change the facts.

      Yes, we all understand that you feel so strongly for the plight of others that you feel the need to say something, *anything*, as some sort of make-you-feel-good-inside moral protest. Your problem is that your thinking is so shallow that all you are doing is appealing to emotion. There is no logic in your protest. There are no facts in your protest. Its just a protest for protests sake, and for that you should be ashamed of yourself. How shallow, petty, and spoiled you are.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    13. Re:Really? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's not forget that it's was the original unions that wanted cottage industries to continue, with the poor practices, the child labour and terrible conditions included - or do you conveniently forget about the acts of destruction gangs of workers carried out against new dangled technologies? The engines destroyed in shipping, the factories burned to the ground (to the point where in England factories started to be built with no flammable material in the structure at all), farming machines destroyed in the night (to the point where farmers were told that they should leave the machines out in the open at night, otherwise they would lose their barns and homes as well).

      If you open your eyes enough, both sides have a terrible history.

    14. Re:Really? by Ihmhi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Workers at foxconn have access to a diverse diet, which, by the way, is actually pretty tough to get on 2 dollars a day.

      More Americans understand this than you think. The 44 million or so of us who are on food stamps - I was one of them - try to live on anywhere from $3-6 a day for food. Just check out some of the various Hunger Challenges out there on the Internets.

    15. Re:Really? by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Informative

      It wasn't just the Luddites in the 19th century that caused problems for those who chose not to join them. My grandfather, along with his brothers, owned a coal mine in Alabama that was effectively shut down by none other than John L. Lewis himself in 1949, in cooperation with other UMW members and the local sheriff. My family already paid more than the prevailing union wage at the time and refused to go along with the short 3-day work week that Lewis had been coordinating nationwide, so Lewis and his thugs showed up to teach them a lesson and started shooting into occupied vehicles and destroying equipment. More than a thousand shots were exchanged, and one of the union thugs died during the attack. Eventually, 13 of the union people were convicted and fined (note that the miner that shot and killed one of the attackers was never even charged), and 10 more (including Lewis) were nolle prossed.

      Interesting that the UMW doesn't care to include that chapter in its history.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    16. Re:Really? by Rennt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is nothing wrong with appealing to emotion in the face of the kind of unfeeling, self-serving rationalization that passes off human suffering as progress.

      Yes, there is cheap labor to be had in China. And yes, both sides in the trade can benefit from that imbalance. You'll get no argument from me there. We get cheap products, they grow their economy. Everybody wins.

      But what we are seeing is not mutual capitalization of this economic imbalance. If it was, Chinese factory workers would be working ~8 hour days and earning the local equivalent of a living wage. What we ARE seeing some of the most profitable corporations in history writing off human and environmental damage on a massive scale as externalities.

      But thanks for the emotionally manipulative ad hominem attacks. The hypocrisy is staggering.

    17. Re:Really? by scamper_22 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No one has ever really given it a second thought.

      Most people who claim to 'care' tend to be from a very colonial mentality. It's the same mentality Europeans used to have in relation to their colonies.

      Never is this more exemplified than in food production. I live in Ontario, Canada. Land of big labor unions. Do you know which group of workers are actually legally prohibited from unionization?

      You betcha, the most vulnerable, at risk, exploited workers... farm workers.

      Why do you suppose this is? Because it is in reality a very colonial attitude that farm workers should not be 'western' workers. That is for lesser beings.

      Even in the 'glory' days of big union. Why is it that you think an auto-worker was earning 80K/year while farm workers struggled in the hot sun for hours on end providing the very food we eat?

      Most societies have never been willing to pay the true cost of labor for its workers. At best, it makes laws that drive the hard jobs overseas or into migrant labor.

      Even in the days of big union, they only focused on a few fields. The auto worker only felt well off because there was a poor non-unionized waitress ready to serve them. Or they could take a vacation and travel to a third world country and take advantage of their cheap labor. How many civilized good labor law Europeans travel to Asia or North Africa to take advantage of the cheap labor... (and cheap women).

      This doesn't even get into the odd realm realm that going for the cheapest labor provides the most needy with the jobs they actually need. There were several studies that showed that when they banned child labor... for example in Bangladesh... it's not like this actually the kids... it just forced them into more poverty and increasingly prostitution. And cheap goods means other poor people can actually get those good cheaply as well.

      Considering money at the end of the day is just us exchanging our own labor, it's typically very hard to really come up with the idea of a 'living wage'. Pay farm workers a living wage and the price of food jumps... and then you want a bigger living wage. Most of what we *need* is just buying labor for each other... typically from the poorest in society. Even things like housing... it's more about competing with your neighbor for the hot location.

    18. Re:Really? by Sir_Sri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Um... they tried the sci fi solutions of wonderful fantasy land and 30 million people starved to death under mao.

      It's not charity. We do that to africa and we simply exacerbate the problem. If you just give people aid you drive prices down and make it hard for them to compete (I mean general aid, not specific disaster relief). It's giving them a fair chance. And it's not some divine paper, in fact I was quite clear on what they're getting in exchange. Clean water, electricity, food, housing that isn't dirt and logs, and eventually, stuff.

      There really is no other way. We can't just give them money, and while we can give them some of the 'stuff' (power generators for example), they need to be able to pay for their use, have staff to be paid to run them, we can't possible match the scale required.

      I'm not sure what dream you're talking about. As a kid (and even now as an adult) I want stuff. A house, a car, computer, food, clothes. I want to be able to retire eventually. I'm only going to get those things by exchanging my labour for them, and we use money as a unit of exchange between the two. It's not that complicated a concept, and it provides the granularity '3 chickens and rack of ribs for my vaccinations' lacks. I'm going to guess that people in china may want slightly different stuff, or they set the bar lower than 'a car' and maybe on clean drinking water. But that's how the world works.

      I said, and it is depressing, there are generations (or at least major portions of generations) of people in china who basically lack the skills to do anything else. In 1980 1 in 5 people in china couldn't read or write. Consider that in north america something like 70% of people have a post secondary education of somesort, and in china you have 20% of people who didn't manage to get to grade 2 or equivalent. They *need* to be able to educate their children (and they are, and have done that), but they have millions of people who are a long way from being able to do anything in a 'knowledge economy'. They are also about 30 years away from having a workforce that is effectively 100% literate (which is the literacy rate for under 24's now), and as that shifts they will be able to do more and more. But right now, for some people, manual labour is as good as it gets.

  2. me! by retchdog · · Score: 5, Funny

    we offer a full line of consumer and professional electronics, athletic apparel, and soy products, all officially certified by the retchdog institute for unicorns and sunshine to be completely free of whatever it is you find objectionable. our modest markup of 1200% is necessary to ensure that only the finest managers, assistant managers, and assistants to assistant managers are hired from a competitive field of my friends and extended family.

    --
    "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  3. No such thing as ethical corporations by jehan60188 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no such thing. Corporations aren't in the business of creating products in an ethical manner. They're in the business of making money by using the cheapest parts and labor possible.. If they could employ slaves, and get away with it, they would.

    1. Re:No such thing as ethical corporations by zedrdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Valid assumption, wrong conclusion.

      Corporations are in the business of making money... and they have long realised one way of doing that was betting on upper-middle-class consumer guilt to pay a premium in exchange for some sort of vaguely-enforced "ethical business" seal-of-approval. It's a niche market, but a market nonetheless.

      Just look at Whole Foods' CEO: not exactly the hippy-dippy type, just a guy who realised there was a market to tap, and tap he did. Call it cynical (it definitely is), but some corporations will behave ethically, just as long as they can make a profit out of it.

  4. From whom can I buy? by c0lo · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  5. Seriously? by Compaqt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is about as useful as asking who doesn't rely on semi-slave labor practices during the industrialization phase of the UK or US (no vacations, Pinkerton detective agency, strikebreaking, pittance wages, etc.).

    Look, this phase is messy, but necessary.

    They can't just start out with a "services" economy all styling each others' hair.

    They have to go through this phase, and it's certainly a step up from the near-starvation they had in the countryside. Then wages go up, slowly, but surely. Before you know it, Chinese will be asking about organic certification before they deign to go to work for a company.

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  6. General Chinese labor conditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work in China. It is worth noting that some of the conditions at Foxconn, while terrible by Western standards, are normal here.

    A Chinese friend worked as a waitress. She thought $400 a month (in a culture where there are no tips) was excellent money. Most meals and a bunk in a shared apartment provided. No heat, at a latitude where frost is moderately common.

    In at 9 am to do cleaning, work until after lunch, sleep in the afternoon, start again at 4:30 and work until closing which was usually about 11 but if customers wanted to stay later, some waitresses would have to stay until 2 or 3. No extra money for that. She got two days a month off, and thought that was generous, but a "day off" meant coming in at 4:30 instead of in the morning.

  7. Re:It's all about the money. by Stormthirst · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a topic that goes around on ./ every now and then.

    When all the manufacturing etc is done by robots - surely the entire capitalist system will crash. The inherent nature of capitalism is to have a triangle - the wide base with people doing low paid jobs, the people who go to university and get a good education to get well paid jobs in the middle, and the 1%ers at the top.

    If you start messing with that triangle, won't the whole thing collapse?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting there's anything inherently wrong with this system (buggy whip manufacturers etc) - but ...?

  8. Re:Silence is golden by dxkelly · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That doesn't excuse it. If slavery is required to make cell phones at a reasonable price then we'll have to do without.
    "I pity the man who wants a coat so cheap that the man or woman who produces the cloth will starve in the process." -- Benjamin Harrison 23rd President

  9. No slaves please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, corporate overlord here. Slaves require room, board, clothes, etc. provided for them. It doesn't come free. It's much much better now underpaying non-slaves, as people line up to replace them.

    Keep complaining though, but make sure not to change your lifestyle at all. Because that works.

  10. Free-Range Smartphones by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have this hookup in Napa Valley which supplies me with free-range electronics. It comes from a commune where they manufacture phones and laptops using sustainable, cruelty-free paleo techniques. Their R&D division is an ayuhuasca hut.

  11. Re:Silence is golden by icebraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Except that alternative is worse for the workers, who already have the option of not working at those factories and, funnily enough, they don't actually prefer it.

    Your solution helps your moral guilty at their expense. For shame.

    http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html

  12. Re:it's the playing field, not the players by Freddybear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Fair labor practices are not something that takes care of itself via an Invisible Hand, be it that of Capitalism or of God."

    Yes, actually, they do improve as a result of market conditions (the so-called invisible hand), when employers have to compete for workers in the marketplace. When there is a glut of labor applying for a few factory jobs, then yes, wages will be low and conditions will be poor. But then more manufacturers will build factories to take advantage of that cheap labor and the supply/demand situation will shift in favor of the workers.
    That is exactly what the "invisible hand" is about.

  13. Re:no, it's not necessary by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    there are ways to produce goods without any of these things. the most productive nation on earth in the 20th century was the united states

    And it got that way by being the United States in the 19th century. Crack a history book.

  14. Re:DIY/Relativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You don't need unlimited time or money, you need to be well organized, know your needs precisely and be willing to learn and work hard.

    I run a small artisan bakery, and I not only build the shop from scratch, but I have also made all the equipment I need myself - including mixers, a rather hi-tech production line including a kneeder, dough laminator, rather complex dough proofer, shaper with corresponding loaders. I myself manage to produce about 500-600 items for about half a day, most of it long-rise bread. My ovens even report stuff on Twitter for my customers.

    Not only is everything DIY (including the cast aluminium boxes for the electronics), it is also cheaper than any alternative with similar capabilities and capacity I've been able to source. And it was all made in my backyard, with hand tools from recycled materials over a year, including the learning. I had never touched a shovel, a saw, a router, a milling machine or a soldering iron before that.

    If you want, you can do it, the problem is everyone wants to be a manager, and nobody wants to do the hard work.

  15. Its consumers not corporations that are to blame by drnb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's no such thing. Corporations aren't in the business of creating products in an ethical manner. They're in the business of making money by using the cheapest parts and labor possible.

    Emphasize "possible". "Possible" includes behavior acceptable to consumers.

    Sweat shops and outsourcing are driven by consumer preferences. Namely the consumer's preference for the absolute lowest price regardless of all other considerations. It is a classic tragedy of the commons situation.

    Corporate greed does *not* inevitably lead to sweat shops and outsourcing. Of primary importance to corporations are sales, and sales are determined by consumers. Outsourcing and sweat shops are only possible if there is consumer indifference, if employing such methods will offend customers and result in lost sales then the "greed" motivation says do not employ such methods.

    Corporate greed actually inevitably leads to satisfying consume demands at the lowest possible cost *and* consistent with consumer expectations. Consumers are actually in control of the methods employed by corporations.

  16. Re:It's all about the money. by AdamWill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've replied to it before on slashdot, but no, that's a fallacy.

    There isn't some magic limited quality of labor that needs to be done, and once we replace all of that with robots, there'll be no work left for people to do any more. That fallacy has existed for hundreds of years. It never quite seems to happen, yet people persist with the belief.

    Couple hundred years ago, it was cotton weaving - see, hundreds of thousands of people used to work weaving cotton, then machines got invented that could perform the job much more efficiently. Surely this would result in there not being enough work for all those people! oh no!

    Well, in a very short timeframe that can happen, but over the long run it just doesn't work out that way. Why? We just keep inventing more work to do. There's no objective definition of 'work'. It's whatever you can get paid to do. Back in the age of manual cotton weaving, for instance, almost no-one made a living in the 'creative industries', which barely existed. Nowadays, tens of thousands of people make a good wage producing utterly unnecessary and frivolous TV shows. The key point is _there's a direct link between the two things_. Automate things that at present take hundreds of thousands of humans to do, and those hundreds of thousands of humans won't - over the long run - starve to death. We'll invent new stuff for them to do. That 'stuff' is frequently frivolous and entirely unnecessary - like television, or advertising, or professional sports, or pet grooming, or personal shopping...the reason all those ridiculous 'jobs' exist is _precisely_ because we've got so good at making the really essential tasks - farming, construction, health care, clothes manufacture, resource extraction, power generation etc - happen very efficiently that, once all of the above tasks are done for everyone in a reasonably developed country, there's still a *massive* potential labor surplus. Via the magic of the free market economy, instead of rationing all the essential labor and the results of that labor out equally so everyone works 5 hours a week and we all live a comfortable life by the standards of 1850, we instead invented a bewildering array of utterly unnecessary 'work' so most people can continue to 'work' 40 hours a week, and be rewarded with the opportunity to buy a crystal-encrufted cellphone, buy a shirt for their dog, and watch 2.5 Men on an HDTV. Ain't humanity great?

    This process can continue more or less indefinitely if we want it to. I see no particular limit to human ingenuity in inventing ridiculous new spheres of activity.

  17. Re:Hypocritical media attack by Niko. · · Score: 4, Informative

    apparently it's not so much the minimal labor wages that make China attractive to manufacturing, but the supply of trained engineers to manage the operation. Apple alone needs hundreds of engineers to supervise the thousands of workers.

    http://www.tuaw.com/2012/01/22/why-apples-products-are-designed-in-california-but-assembled/

  18. Re:Nokia by sourcerror · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can confirm that. A Nokia factory closed this month in Hungary. They're moving it to Asia too.

  19. That always reminds me of this comic. by khasim · · Score: 4, Funny

    NSFW for language
    http://www.oglaf.com/relief/