Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
CarbonBasedLifeform

Global Serfdom For The Masses

Recommended Posts

ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

Globalisation is just neo liberal ideology on an international scale. An ideology designed by the rich elite to maintain and expand their power and wealth.

Of course the great majority of working people in developed countries will experiance a significant drop in thier standard of living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you need is an import/export system that is a bit communist.

eg places value on human labour.

At the moment India & China etc have huge barriers and restrictions on imports while subsidising exports.

Really the rich nations should be penalising imports from poor countries with crappy wages to level the playing field and drive up the wages in the poor country.

I have no issue with the theory of a global workplace and global competition if that competition is fair.

A British worker with skills simply can't compete with an Indian worker when the Indian can provide an above average living standard for a family of four with a wage that undercuts the amount the Brit has to pay in council tax alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you need is an import/export system that is a bit communist.

eg places value on human labour.

At the moment India & China etc have huge barriers and restrictions on imports while subsidising exports.

Really the rich nations should be penalising imports from poor countries with crappy wages to level the playing field and drive up the wages in the poor country.

I have no issue with the theory of a global workplace and global competition if that competition is fair.

A British worker with skills simply can't compete with an Indian worker when the Indian can provide an above average living standard for a family of four with a wage that undercuts the amount the Brit has to pay in council tax alone.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Relax, in the west we continue to make money by selling our houses to each other...

Oh, wait...

actually, we make money by earning commission and interest on the sales of mortgages and marketing houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

You've missed the point.

The reason it's cheaper to make stuff in india is because rent/land/housing costs are lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations, you have spotted the flaw in Globalization that has had right-of-centre economists shouted down as racists and other undesirable personal slander for the last 15 years.

The question is who benefits?

Not the Chinese who will soon find their factories idle and 200M angry people ready to eviscerate the government.

Not the West who will be destitute and addled with a generation of hopeless and unskilled young.

Who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some factory workers in China (Guangdong region) make as much as 5000 RMB/ month, this is the equivalent of 40K/ year (pounds) in the UK if you consider the purchasing power of that salary.

Just goes to show there must be profit in creating valuable things for the world to use at fair prices.

Unfortunately because of globalism we as workers have to compete with countries with much lower living costs. Everyone should ask themselves if Britain having a high living cost necessarily benefits us or is actually a large drawback :)

I remember someone mentioning that many more things could be manufactured in the UK even if sterling dropped a little as importing must be expensive, sorry this isn't the case because importing small goods is very cheap on large volume it's just big items like cars which are cheaper to produce locally hence why you have Japanese car plants in the UK etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

Exactly!! It isn't rocket science is it? A couple of points though: 10% of UK cost is closer than 50%. Mr Dyson doesn't have a lot of choice because if he doesn't move his manufacturing to China his competitors, will so his workers will be laid off anyway and then he won't be making any profit either!

Blaming the business owner is simplistic. The problem has much deeper roots. Either the Western countries will allow their standard of living to go down to that of the Chinese, at which point they will be able to manufacture their own stuff, or the Western countries will employ protectionism and immigration control. I would be happy to consider a third option. Any offers? Next move IMHO is that China makes the stuff itself and cuts out the middleman (Mr. Dyson).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Developed industrialised nations don't necessarily need to lower their standard of living in order to lower the general cost of living. But then I guess because of the strange criteria that are used to quantify "standard of living", we have no choice, if we are to use the official measures, than to equate cost of living with standard of living as if they are the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main flaw in the Globalisation idea is that the "new" workers will have the same desire for meaningless consumerism as the Americans and Europeans. They don't, they'd rather save it.

The global serfdom idea, well that's nothing new. We've always been serfs, apart from a brief period following the second world war. We will continue to be serfs until we either revolt, or the glut of labour is solved. Perhaps peak oil will do this in the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is any way you can fight globalisation; whileever an imbalance of wealth exists between the East* and West, it is surely impossible to stop.

At some point, once wealth has been distributed more evenly around the globe, we will surely be able to make and sell things again. The problem is, with the Western consumption being based on debt fuelled by the East, we have allowed the gap to remain for longer than it would have done otherwise. It is hard to envisage how this is going to end in an amicable way as a result.

It does beg the question: Why did the East keep lending the West money? They must have realised this situation would happen and must surely expect there to be a risk of countries defaulting on the debt too. Perhaps the East is just as equally at fault for trying to grow their manufacturing industry beyond what Western salaries could afford?

*East/West meaning poor/rich countries.

EDIT: usual typos!

Edited by Traktion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i,m going to be poor i refuse to do it in this damp, grey,depressing, chav infested sh**hole, if i can only get the same salary here as someone in italy spain or france why would i stay here? once the opportunity to earn a decent standard of living dissapears in the uk why would anyone stay?

if we are going a la argentina minus the sun , then i will choose to be poor somewhere less depressing, at least i can sit in the sun and drink some cheap local vino to forget my problems on my days off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Globalisation is just neo liberal ideology on an international scale. An ideology designed by the rich elite to maintain and expand their power and wealth.

Of course the great majority of working people in developed countries will experiance a significant drop in thier standard of living.

unfortunately globalisation is nothing of the sort.There is no happy clappy communist all-share world system!!!

conservation of energy dictates that as one side gains another side loses.

the priciple behind world economics is not dissimilar to arable crop rotation.

and the western world has been pretty much exhausted by debt.

I'm afraid it's stubble burning time.

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

First of all, yes, you are being feeble minded. Dyson actually transferred the manufacturing to Malaysia about 8 years ago - not China. The high end jobs though like the accountants, lawyers, designers, marketing etc are still in Wiltshire or Singapore. Your talk of Dyson and his yachts is rather silly. Had he not moved his manufacturing to Malaysia where it is half the price to make the stuff, perhaps he would have gone bust and the accountants, lawyers, designers in Wiltshire would have lost their jobs. I suppose you would have been happy then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

mr dyson makes his vacum cleaners at a 50% cost saving from his new factory in china and sells his vacum cleaners to western salary level wage earners as his chinese employees can,t afford them.

mr dyson has indeed made a bigger profit from this move and brags about it to all his business chums at the golf course and yachting club, these chums decide that they too want a 300ft yacht instead of a 150 ft yacht and they too move their business operations to low cost countries and sack all their uk/ eu workforces thereby saving on production costs and selling at premium prices in the rich western economies, as their employees cannot afford the products and services they produce/provide.

this cycle continues until everything that can be produced cheaper elsewhere is moved to save on costs and increase profits.

my obvious point is this there must be a tipping point where the market for these goods is destroyed as all the people earning the salary levels needed to pay for these "premium" products have lost thier employment due to globalisation and they now cannot afford these dysons and plasmas etc.

ok so mr dyson etc gained a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE by moving to china etc but everyone else copied the business model and now they have noone to sell to unless they cut prices and therefore profits to a level that the new global serf workforce can afford to buy their wares.

WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS GREAT GLOBALISATION EXCERSISE?

WHO ARE THE LONG TERM WINNERS?

the banks will lose as uk workers on new globaliseD salary levels can only affor houses at 3 times their average 6k salaries etc etc.

JUST SEEMS LIKE A ZERO SUM GAME TO ME, WE IN THE WEST GET ALOT POORER , THE EAST ETC GET A BIT RICHER the costs will be staggering and likely result in war.

The model worked for about a decade but it was dependent on the profits made by the exporting nations being recycled to create new loans to consumers, governments and businesses in the West. The system imploded when the interest on the debt essentially became greater than earning power in countries such as the USA and the UK could support . The current round of QE by Western governments is a desperate attempt to fix this crisis. Contrary, to what some on this board believe I do not think its central aim is to ramp up inflation or to underpin asset prices (although western governments probably would not mind those results) rather it is an attempt to prop up the financial system by keeping interest rates low so that the existing debts can be serviced out of current income. Central Banks have been pumping liquidity into the financial system to ensure short term money as measured by things such as LIBOR plentiful and cheap while longer term interest rates are being suppressed by the CB funded purchases of Treasury and Gilts (governments essentially buying their own debt). The problem with this solution is that while it may alleviate the problem in the short term it is is just laying the basis for further bigger government debt crises down the road. Additionally the damage done to world economy means that earnings are still contracting which means the amount of bad unserviceable debt continues to grow even in a ZIRP environment.

The globalist free market argument that in the long term it is beneficial for production to move to the areas of lowest cost is not without merits. However, it rather misses the point that uncontrolled credit bubbles see massive malinvestment in both importing and exporting countries which is likely to negate much of the upside. Although it appears to be a difficult concept to grasp rapidly building factories in China or Malaysia to feed such a boom may be every bit as unsustainable as bidding up the prices of houses in the UK and the US. Indeed, a houses built during such the UK boom may have longer lasting use than a factory manufacturing trainers in the Far East. The collapse of the credit bubble is every bit as dangerous to Asians as Europeans and Americans. Since there are going to be a lot of angry people in all parts who will suffer real hardship because of this fiasco I expect that your predictions about future conflict, probably preceded by bouts of protectionism, is not going to be far from the mark. In the short term pump priming the system has kept the globalist show on the road but sooner or later internal political pressure will force one of the major players to break ranks and quit the game. Both China and the USA have strong isolationist tendencies lying not far below the surface in their cultures so I expect one of them may be first to crack (possibly China if recent banking policy changes are the start of a new trend). When that happens the pump wont work anymore because the vandals will have definitely removed the handle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The main flaw in the Globalisation idea is that the "new" workers will have the same desire for meaningless consumerism as the Americans and Europeans. They don't, they'd rather save it.

The huge new business class in China buy half or most domestic goods, and the rest of them (middle and working class) still spend a good amount on consumerism.

Like I've noticed even working class guys will waste 2-3 pounds each for bottles of beer in a restuarant or club, THAT is definitely consumerism. Chinese people will consume as much as we did, if not much more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be possible for the UK to compete without much manufacturing if her population was much lower , say 10 million.far fewer imports and a greater percentage of food going to these countries with ever expanding populations and appetites.10 mill UK population would be a net exporter with a trade surplus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The model worked for about a decade but it was dependent on the profits made by the exporting nations being recycled to create new loans to consumers, governments and businesses in the West. The system imploded when the interest on the debt essentially became greater than earning power in countries such as the USA and the UK could support . The current round of QE by Western governments is a desperate attempt to fix this crisis. Contrary, to what some on this board believe I do not think its central aim is to ramp up inflation or to underpin asset prices (although western governments probably would not mind those results) rather it is an attempt to prop up the financial system by keeping interest rates low so that the existing debts can be serviced out of current income. Central Banks have been pumping liquidity into the financial system to ensure short term money as measured by things such as LIBOR plentiful and cheap while longer term interest rates are being suppressed by the CB funded purchases of Treasury and Gilts (governments essentially buying their own debt). The problem with this solution is that while it may alleviate the problem in the short term it is is just laying the basis for further bigger government debt crises down the road. Additionally the damage done to world economy means that earnings are still contracting which means the amount of bad unserviceable debt continues to grow even in a ZIRP environment.

The globalist free market argument that in the long term it is beneficial for production to move to the areas of lowest cost is not without merits. However, it rather misses the point that uncontrolled credit bubbles see massive malinvestment in both importing and exporting countries which is likely to negate much of the upside. Although it appears to be a difficult concept to grasp rapidly building factories in China or Malaysia to feed such a boom may be every bit as unsustainable as bidding up the prices of houses in the UK and the US. Indeed, a houses built during such the UK boom may have longer lasting use than a factory manufacturing trainers in the Far East. The collapse of the credit bubble is every bit as dangerous to Asians as Europeans and Americans. Since there are going to be a lot of angry people in all parts who will suffer real hardship because of this fiasco I expect that your predictions about future conflict, probably preceded by bouts of protectionism, is not going to be far from the mark. In the short term pump priming the system has kept the globalist show on the road but sooner or later internal political pressure will force one of the major players to break ranks and quit the game. Both China and the USA have strong isolationist tendencies lying not far below the surface in their cultures so I expect one of them may be first to crack (possibly China if recent banking policy changes are the start of a new trend). When that happens the pump wont work anymore because the vandals will have definitely removed the handle.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KingCharles1st
You've missed the point.

The reason it's cheaper to make stuff in india is because rent/land/housing costs are lower.

Thank You....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible.

Henry Ford recognised the importance of paying your employees a decent wage so they were able to buy your company's products...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if i,m going to be poor i refuse to do it in this damp, grey,depressing, chav infested sh**hole, if i can only get the same salary here as someone in italy spain or france why would i stay here? once the opportunity to earn a decent standard of living dissapears in the uk why would anyone stay?

if we are going a la argentina minus the sun , then i will choose to be poor somewhere less depressing, at least i can sit in the sun and drink some cheap local vino to forget my problems on my days off.

Yep.

Being "poor" doesn't have to suck. IMHO it's when being "poor" is rubbed in your face or when the "poor" really pine to be rich that it (being poor) sucks.

I'm working poor but living well. I ride an entry level mountain bike, saved up for some decent firearms that put food on my table but I drive a car that is far from trendy, drink home-brew (far superior to commercial swill and far cheaper)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok bear with me i,m of feeble mind but am i wrong on this?

eg mr dyson makes vacum cleaners here in the uk and employs uk workers , these uk workers pay tax and earn uk level salaries this allows them to buy cheap imported plasma tvs, cars etc etc.

mr dyson decides to move his plant to china and sack all his uk employees and they now mostly find their way onto benefits

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1805050.stm

Or Mr Dyson is pissed off with local petty minded councillors after investing £32 million in the plant in two years and then being refused planning permission to expand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   295 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.