If each individual had perfect knowledge of the system, a willingness to listen to the best opinion and go with it without the a final authority figure, a very large capacity for communication between different members, and a lot of other ifs.....
Management helps in efficient delegation.
If this technology was available, it would be able to make individual companies make decisions on hiring and firing efficiently already.
---
All research costs resources - researching everything would not necessarily drive innovation.
--
Engineers can be bribed too.
--
How was Stalin suspertitious and based on myth?
How are you going to attain a pure rational / logical system with humans? Perfect knowledge and perfect selflessness? How can you attain pure systems when people are liars, adulterers, murderers, rapists?
--
Do you have some examples? Also, yes the business cycle makes some rich, but evidence in Bangalore, where the programmers earn ~ 10000 US/year (much more than the local gardener, cook), we've observed that the wages of local gardeners have also increased - 4 fold in the last four years.
The problem with government trying to maximize employment is that it doesn't have the macro and micro scale omniscience to know where to employ people and how much to pay them. The market (driven by people's desires and needs) will best determine where people are needed. If people wnat more entertainment, they will pay for it in movies, music, etc. If people determine that they want more technology, their checkbooks will drive research in that field (ipods, better keyboards, lcd monitors). The government is too slow to respond to individual needs and desires. Individual checkbooks respond the quickest.
--
It has everything to do with people born evil. You can't stop the cycle of oppression by economic and political mechanisms alone - people just find another way to oppress and/or cheat. Just look at Stalin (oppress) and campaign finance (cheat).
--
The economic system allows for it because people are willing to pay for it. Once society decides that is not right, they can show that with their checkbook.
--
I disagree with your last point. You are factoring in "cheaters". In the case you factor in cheaters, the most efficient company can also bribe politicians.
All things held equal, my point of the company which offers the right salary for the right people, eliminating unneccessary positions, paying people what they should be paid, will win.
The 1000 multiple point is in regards to that there are other positions in the world other than top corporate CEOs that make mega bucks.
Its clear that in sports, etc. there are a few that are somewhat "worth" their extra cost. Sports teams are willing to pay a premium for that extra-good player.
Ok, ~400 x $6/hour is 2400/hour. x 40 is ~ 100000 a week * 50 is ~ 5,000,000 / year.
If you take out Bill Gates and the other 9 top earners, you should get something down to half.
Ok, so a CEO, who manages anywhere from 1000 to 100000 people makes about 10-50 times the salary of a good programmer.
With all the dumb CEOs out there, I'm willing to let companies shell out a little more money if they can get me someone who can manage a 10000 person company well.
The lower cost of living in India in China is true. However, what matters is how much they cost to the company. If US companies don't hire labor at better rates, foreign companies will. Foreign companies will the produce goods cheaper and better than US companies, whereas then foreign nations will buy foreign company goods instead of the US. Then US companies will go defunct because they can't match the productivity of foreign companies.
Actually, I was going to continue software engineering, but partly because of the outsourcing issue I decided to move away from it .
Name any of the most oppressive gulag-running regimes in the 20th century and you will realize they are not run by corporations but by a few elite individuals hoarding power for themselves, but who were supposed to be a party for the working class.
Same human-types in power. Just power in the hands of a smaller group.
I'm more concerned with authoritarian big government, where they actually jail and kill people (gulags anyone?).
If you don't trust corporations, why trust government? Government can and has wielded their power more freely than corporations.
1a. Labor will be more in surplus if the government decides what people should buy and where people should work. When the government decides more, people decide less. Easy equation.
1b. Well, I can't argue for those who are greedy. If you say all are greedy and dark in heart, why trust a few government officials (often easily the most corrupt of people). If you say everyone is like that when they are born, I agree with you:). It takes a supernatural change of heart for people to do good.
2. I don't dispute CEO / co-founder statistics. The average basketball superstar probably earns 1000 times minimum wage.
3. Well, you'll probably still have that for a while - the big bosses paying themselves generously. But like I said, the most efficient company will win at the end.
Long term though, lets say competitor software companies in other countries (SAP is a german firm) do outsource and make good products at a cheaper price.
If US companies don't outsource, they will lose to companies like SAP and Wipro.
Eventually, US jobs will still disappear for the time being, because foreign firms can make better software products for cheaper.
If the US wants to build walls of tariffs for outside products, then it will cost more for other US industries to produce goods (as their material, infrastructure, software all cost more now because of tariffs). The same fate will await them as foreign firms whose base cost is cheaper can make better products for the world.
The world will stop buying from the US and then even more people's jobs will be lost.
Fair enough. The same thing happened to my father, except he was able to get back in the work force. It is difficult here, especially when there is silent age discrimination.
I've moved away from software engineering for the time being to avoid the crunch.
We've outsourced many industries.
Concrete.
Clothing.
Shoes.
even tombstone heads.
All these outsourced industries leads to lower costs of goods, leading to an increase in the standard of living for people world wide.
A farmer just like all of his ancestors....
Umm... which people group never had farmers? Are you saying that some races should go forward into modern industry and some people should be farmers?
If being a farmer is better than being industrialized, shouldn't you be encouraging the US to do so - isn't it better for China to have "slave wages of industrialization" rather than the US.
Three and a half comments:
1a) Technically, people have a choice to work where they want to. Their wages are "fair" because they choose to work there, not because they happened to wait in line long enough for the government to appoint them to that position.
1b) "Right" wages (different from "fair") should be determined by employers, not the government, as a moral obligation.
2) Most managers do not earn tens or thousands more. The differential can be measurable, but within one order of magnitude, unless you are a co-founder or VP of a large firm.
3) If the managers were useless, then another company which doesn't have the useless managers would be able to produce the same product for less, and people would start buying from that other company. Then the inefficient company would need to cut people. Remenicent of the efficiency of the Japanese auto industry... something the US has already been learning from (and cutting useless positions).
Saved by Grace - what does that mean to you?
"Was not my soul grieved for the poor?"
-Job 30:25
"...He who is kind to the needy honors [God]."
-Proverbs 14:31
"Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me." -Matthew 25: 40
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress..." -James 1:27
Don't you care about the poor in other nations?
I have found your article on 24 cents an hour in China
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/07/international/as ia/07CHIN.html?ex=1093752000&en=611707b67993ff1a&e i=5070
"I keep this job because my parents and my daughter depend on the money I earn," said one migrant worker, who if named could lose her position for talking about the company. "No one likes to work in these conditions, but I have no choice."
I guess would it be better for this person to not have a job to be able to feed their family?
How many people from country X are worth a person in country Y to you?
Costs will sink until *people* are paid fairly for what they do. Why shouldn't someone in the Phillpines get paid better for the same programming job as someone in India.
In China, the growth in the manufacturing industry has been increasing demand for workers so that manufacturers in China now need to compete for employees, raising wages, improving work conditions.
In Banagalore, gardeners four years ago were earning 1000 rupees a month. Their salaries have increased to 4000 a month because of the ability of the programmers in Bangalore to pay more in salary.
Any low wage that is being paid now in China and India will increase rapidly.
Would it be better then for people in China to continue to be paid event lower than they are now for the jobs they held before?
One government to manage it? Government is run by special interests, not the interests of people. People vote with their checkbook what is important to them.
The USSR already tried central planning of cost of goods. This resulted in food shortages, long lines for groceries, lack of choice in goods.
If you want the government to manage payment and cost of goods sold, you should try emarxistbay.com and try to set prices for goods without considering what people would pay for them.
We are already buying billions of material from China, material which is too expensive to manufacture in the US because of all the red tape, taxes, and lawsuits that are filed against US companies.
Last time I checked, the US has been increasing its GDP year after year. Getting raw goods cheaper from overseas means that the US can manufacture goods here. Lower prices for goods means a higher standard of living for all.
Impoverishing the US for China, at 24 cents an hour? Programmers in India are already working for $12000/year. Stop making up numbers.
Ok, lets say for sake of argument, that it does help China and India more for now, helping them get industrialized. If so, what's wrong with that?
If you are a Marxist, don't you believe that people should get paid equally (not even necessarily for equal work:P)?
I'm sorry, in the short term it might not benefit you as the programmer. But you were the one that chose to do programming and because of your choice, you have to face the fact that thousands of people overseas whose families earn 1/10th of your income also need to eat. They'll be asking the question how come they can do similar work as you and me and are willing to be paid 1/5 to 1/10th of what people in the US earn, but they shouldn't get the jobs?
The difference is that there will be
1) jobs which are more productive / efficient for the world and
2) a more equitable distribution of wealth in the world.
1 - Technology made automated manufacturing lines possible, reduced the number of manual manufacturing jobs initially. This freed up people to do other types of work. If a machine / program can do a good job in a certain area, why tie a human to that work? It makes sense to free up people as much as possible, to do things machines can't, utilizing more creativity and ability that machines do not have. Technology will help that.
2 - pausing on the debate of how outsourcing can actually bring jobs back to the US, many people who complain about outsourcing just don't care about people outside the US. Outsourcing means better pay for people in countries not as rich as the US. Its fair for people in other countries to be paid well for similar work we do in the US. If you have any moral sense, you would care also about the wages of people overseas.
-Edward
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt that we can have an expert system at that level. At that level, then much of human labor will be replaced as well.
If each individual had perfect knowledge of the system, a willingness to listen to the best opinion and go with it without the a final authority figure, a very large capacity for communication between different members, and a lot of other ifs..... Management helps in efficient delegation.
If this technology was available, it would be able to make individual companies make decisions on hiring and firing efficiently already. --- All research costs resources - researching everything would not necessarily drive innovation. -- Engineers can be bribed too. -- How was Stalin suspertitious and based on myth? How are you going to attain a pure rational / logical system with humans? Perfect knowledge and perfect selflessness? How can you attain pure systems when people are liars, adulterers, murderers, rapists? -- Do you have some examples? Also, yes the business cycle makes some rich, but evidence in Bangalore, where the programmers earn ~ 10000 US/year (much more than the local gardener, cook), we've observed that the wages of local gardeners have also increased - 4 fold in the last four years.
The problem with government trying to maximize employment is that it doesn't have the macro and micro scale omniscience to know where to employ people and how much to pay them. The market (driven by people's desires and needs) will best determine where people are needed. If people wnat more entertainment, they will pay for it in movies, music, etc. If people determine that they want more technology, their checkbooks will drive research in that field (ipods, better keyboards, lcd monitors). The government is too slow to respond to individual needs and desires. Individual checkbooks respond the quickest. -- It has everything to do with people born evil. You can't stop the cycle of oppression by economic and political mechanisms alone - people just find another way to oppress and/or cheat. Just look at Stalin (oppress) and campaign finance (cheat). -- The economic system allows for it because people are willing to pay for it. Once society decides that is not right, they can show that with their checkbook. -- I disagree with your last point. You are factoring in "cheaters". In the case you factor in cheaters, the most efficient company can also bribe politicians. All things held equal, my point of the company which offers the right salary for the right people, eliminating unneccessary positions, paying people what they should be paid, will win.
The 1000 multiple point is in regards to that there are other positions in the world other than top corporate CEOs that make mega bucks. Its clear that in sports, etc. there are a few that are somewhat "worth" their extra cost. Sports teams are willing to pay a premium for that extra-good player.
Ok, ~400 x $6/hour is 2400/hour. x 40 is ~ 100000 a week * 50 is ~ 5,000,000 / year. If you take out Bill Gates and the other 9 top earners, you should get something down to half. Ok, so a CEO, who manages anywhere from 1000 to 100000 people makes about 10-50 times the salary of a good programmer. With all the dumb CEOs out there, I'm willing to let companies shell out a little more money if they can get me someone who can manage a 10000 person company well.
The lower cost of living in India in China is true. However, what matters is how much they cost to the company. If US companies don't hire labor at better rates, foreign companies will. Foreign companies will the produce goods cheaper and better than US companies, whereas then foreign nations will buy foreign company goods instead of the US. Then US companies will go defunct because they can't match the productivity of foreign companies. Actually, I was going to continue software engineering, but partly because of the outsourcing issue I decided to move away from it .
Name any of the most oppressive gulag-running regimes in the 20th century and you will realize they are not run by corporations but by a few elite individuals hoarding power for themselves, but who were supposed to be a party for the working class. Same human-types in power. Just power in the hands of a smaller group.
I'm more concerned with authoritarian big government, where they actually jail and kill people (gulags anyone?). If you don't trust corporations, why trust government? Government can and has wielded their power more freely than corporations.
1a. Labor will be more in surplus if the government decides what people should buy and where people should work. When the government decides more, people decide less. Easy equation. 1b. Well, I can't argue for those who are greedy. If you say all are greedy and dark in heart, why trust a few government officials (often easily the most corrupt of people). If you say everyone is like that when they are born, I agree with you :). It takes a supernatural change of heart for people to do good.
2. I don't dispute CEO / co-founder statistics. The average basketball superstar probably earns 1000 times minimum wage.
3. Well, you'll probably still have that for a while - the big bosses paying themselves generously. But like I said, the most efficient company will win at the end.
Long term though, lets say competitor software companies in other countries (SAP is a german firm) do outsource and make good products at a cheaper price. If US companies don't outsource, they will lose to companies like SAP and Wipro. Eventually, US jobs will still disappear for the time being, because foreign firms can make better software products for cheaper. If the US wants to build walls of tariffs for outside products, then it will cost more for other US industries to produce goods (as their material, infrastructure, software all cost more now because of tariffs). The same fate will await them as foreign firms whose base cost is cheaper can make better products for the world. The world will stop buying from the US and then even more people's jobs will be lost.
Fair enough. The same thing happened to my father, except he was able to get back in the work force. It is difficult here, especially when there is silent age discrimination. I've moved away from software engineering for the time being to avoid the crunch.
We've outsourced many industries. Concrete. Clothing. Shoes. even tombstone heads. All these outsourced industries leads to lower costs of goods, leading to an increase in the standard of living for people world wide.
A farmer just like all of his ancestors.... Umm... which people group never had farmers? Are you saying that some races should go forward into modern industry and some people should be farmers? If being a farmer is better than being industrialized, shouldn't you be encouraging the US to do so - isn't it better for China to have "slave wages of industrialization" rather than the US.
Three and a half comments: 1a) Technically, people have a choice to work where they want to. Their wages are "fair" because they choose to work there, not because they happened to wait in line long enough for the government to appoint them to that position. 1b) "Right" wages (different from "fair") should be determined by employers, not the government, as a moral obligation. 2) Most managers do not earn tens or thousands more. The differential can be measurable, but within one order of magnitude, unless you are a co-founder or VP of a large firm. 3) If the managers were useless, then another company which doesn't have the useless managers would be able to produce the same product for less, and people would start buying from that other company. Then the inefficient company would need to cut people. Remenicent of the efficiency of the Japanese auto industry... something the US has already been learning from (and cutting useless positions).
Saved by Grace - what does that mean to you? "Was not my soul grieved for the poor?" -Job 30:25 "...He who is kind to the needy honors [God]." -Proverbs 14:31 "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me." -Matthew 25: 40 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress..." -James 1:27 Don't you care about the poor in other nations?
I have found your article on 24 cents an hour in China http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/07/international/as ia/07CHIN.html?ex=1093752000&en=611707b67993ff1a&e i=5070
"I keep this job because my parents and my daughter depend on the money I earn," said one migrant worker, who if named could lose her position for talking about the company. "No one likes to work in these conditions, but I have no choice."
I guess would it be better for this person to not have a job to be able to feed their family?
How many people from country X are worth a person in country Y to you?
Costs will sink until *people* are paid fairly for what they do. Why shouldn't someone in the Phillpines get paid better for the same programming job as someone in India. In China, the growth in the manufacturing industry has been increasing demand for workers so that manufacturers in China now need to compete for employees, raising wages, improving work conditions. In Banagalore, gardeners four years ago were earning 1000 rupees a month. Their salaries have increased to 4000 a month because of the ability of the programmers in Bangalore to pay more in salary. Any low wage that is being paid now in China and India will increase rapidly. Would it be better then for people in China to continue to be paid event lower than they are now for the jobs they held before?
One government to manage it? Government is run by special interests, not the interests of people. People vote with their checkbook what is important to them. The USSR already tried central planning of cost of goods. This resulted in food shortages, long lines for groceries, lack of choice in goods. If you want the government to manage payment and cost of goods sold, you should try emarxistbay.com and try to set prices for goods without considering what people would pay for them. We are already buying billions of material from China, material which is too expensive to manufacture in the US because of all the red tape, taxes, and lawsuits that are filed against US companies. Last time I checked, the US has been increasing its GDP year after year. Getting raw goods cheaper from overseas means that the US can manufacture goods here. Lower prices for goods means a higher standard of living for all. Impoverishing the US for China, at 24 cents an hour? Programmers in India are already working for $12000/year. Stop making up numbers.
Ok, lets say for sake of argument, that it does help China and India more for now, helping them get industrialized. If so, what's wrong with that? If you are a Marxist, don't you believe that people should get paid equally (not even necessarily for equal work :P)?
I'm sorry, in the short term it might not benefit you as the programmer. But you were the one that chose to do programming and because of your choice, you have to face the fact that thousands of people overseas whose families earn 1/10th of your income also need to eat. They'll be asking the question how come they can do similar work as you and me and are willing to be paid 1/5 to 1/10th of what people in the US earn, but they shouldn't get the jobs?
The difference is that there will be 1) jobs which are more productive / efficient for the world and 2) a more equitable distribution of wealth in the world. 1 - Technology made automated manufacturing lines possible, reduced the number of manual manufacturing jobs initially. This freed up people to do other types of work. If a machine / program can do a good job in a certain area, why tie a human to that work? It makes sense to free up people as much as possible, to do things machines can't, utilizing more creativity and ability that machines do not have. Technology will help that. 2 - pausing on the debate of how outsourcing can actually bring jobs back to the US, many people who complain about outsourcing just don't care about people outside the US. Outsourcing means better pay for people in countries not as rich as the US. Its fair for people in other countries to be paid well for similar work we do in the US. If you have any moral sense, you would care also about the wages of people overseas. -Edward