From: cryofan@mylinuxisp.com
Date: Tue Jun 18 2002 - 13:15:41 MDT
"Dickey, Michael F" <michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com> said:
> From: Randy [mailto:cryofan@mylinuxisp.com]
>
> "I disagree. Here are my reasons: globalization is an effect of
> intelligent, directed efforts. It is directed by those who buy and
> sell labor, the fruits of others' labor. Because, as the ancient laws
> of commerce dictate, they profit when they buy low and sell high,
> they therefore want lower prices for labor. So tell me, please, why
> "things have a stronger chance to level up than level-out or down."
>
> The same ancient laws of commerce dictate that when demand exceeds supply,
> prices increase. The more organizations that vie for low cost labor, the
> more that labor costs. Since labor is a finite resource, the theory goes,
> demand would outpace it and thus increase the cost of it (that is, the pay
> to the laborers)
You erroneously assume
1. That the growth rate of buyers of labor increases, period.
2. That the growth rate of buyers of labor increases at a greater rate than
the rate at which the supply of labor increases.
Why should the more buyers come into the market at all? The current buyers of
labor, the ones that buy pro-globalization laws from our Congress, are the
ones which have power and money, which they use to stifle new competition.
That is the law of the jungle. Ever see a male lion in charge of a pride run
off a newcomer male? He is well fed through the efforts of his females, and
so he has the power to dominate newcomers.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:53 MST