|
The concept of "local" is itself sorta fuzzy these days.
On one side you hear - increase minimum wage.
On the other side you hear - local labor is expensive, hence the Chinese goods.
Increase in globalization will always hurt the first world more than the developing nations. The one way to fight that is to improve efficiency, find better energy sources, minimize waste, reduce population etc. Easier said than done.
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Sivakumar wrote: reduce population
What?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a pretty easy concept. The first three things he listed, "improve efficiency, find better energy sources, minimize waste", are more easily approached and solved with a smaller population.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
modified 29-Sep-14 11:36am.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
And so, uh... who is he implying we "reduce"? Or maybe there is a demographic of undesirables?
Must that part of history repeat?
|
|
|
|
|
Noo... reducing the ones that are already there is not a good idea and you probably won't get away with it... history should tell us. 
Uhm... how to reduce... forced vasectomy?
|
|
|
|
|
Pualee wrote: Or maybe there is a demographic of undesirables?
Well, we could start with VB programmers.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Or stop consuming like there's infinite resources?
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
|
there's no difference between mail order then and mail order now.
but, in 1900 you simply could not get everything locally. mail order was the only way to get a lot of things.
that's not the case for most people, today.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Losinger wrote: but, in 1900 you simply could not get everything locally.
Still can't get everything locally. Not even close. And I live in a moderately large size town and have not one but two walmarts relatively close to where I live.
Probably because there are far more choices now.
|
|
|
|
|
Me think that in the 1900, the US industrial base was a lot more varied than what it is right now and most of the stuff we bought back then was made "locally" in the US; today, most of the stuff we buy comes from abroad.
One could argue that neither is good (amazon vs. walmart vs. other big box store) from a "buy local" and "buy sustainable" point of view.
There is a culture in America (and getting there elsewhere) that you need to buy often, buy cheap and buy in large quantity to show that you are participating in the economy.
It is my opinions that we need to buy less often, in less quantity and in better quality and as local as possible, even if that means skipping over organic food produce that comes from across the globe for locally grown produce even if not organic (for example)
And that it is preferable to skip meat (I'm not a string vegetarian/vegan) if there are meatless alternatives; I will eat fresh fruits and vegetables and nuts and grains and cheeses instead of meat if I can and if the produces are in season.
I prefer spending more (and sometimes a lot more) for a really nice dry aged prime rib roast than eat crappy meat every day.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: that in the 1900, the US industrial base was a lot more varied than what it is right now
Depends on what you mean, but in general no.
There are a vast array of manufacturing concerns spread across the US now. Those would be businesses that make money and which actually construct something day to day in a process that is assembly line like. As one minor example - boats.
This doesn't include individuals who have hobbies where they make something and then attempt to sell it. One could argue that there were many people in the 1900s that did that at well but I suspect that in terms of marketing more people (individuals) have more access to sales venues and that offset and difference in total percentage of population doing that in the 1900. After all you can sell a lot more hand made dresses on craigs list and in hobby markets than you can by trading it for a pig to the lady in the farm over the hill.
|
|
|
|
|
rnbergren wrote: So riddle me this batman (and Bat Ladies) What the heck is the difference between buying from Sears via the Mail from 1900 and buying from Amazon via the mail/ups of today?
You could and they did wipe your butt with the Sears catalog.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
|
There is also a lot of contest about Amazon in France, but less because of the local/non-local question:
- Amazon does not pay any benefit taxes although being present on the French soil
- Amazon working paces are close to slavery for the workers packaging the orders.
More generally, about local buying, I certainly does not find it amusing to buy anything from the other side of the planet while I could have here, for the mere convenience of being able to do it from home. What really sucks, is that this item is about 70% cheaper than if I'd bought it locally, not even counting the gas to drive to the store. That is something that shows the world is not spinning round.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Then, you could order a Thomson Automatic out of the Montgomery Ward catalog as well as cocaine, heroine or other interesting substances (under popular brand names).
Back then, truly there was no ATF, there was only the "convenience store".
Oh and you could wipe your bum with the Sears catalog. It's a bit messier with the electronic version of the Bezos Post, as much as one might want to.
modified 29-Sep-14 11:06am.
|
|
|
|
|
rnbergren wrote: Discuss???
Ehr.. no.
I'm merely going to point out that the sentiment has a reason.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Why did Sears use offshore companies so that they paid next to no corporation tax locally , but took them in Bermuda where there is zero corporation tax ? Thus leaving their customers having no tax benefit , and also giving them an unfair advantage compared to the locally based company that only works within their national tax system ? I doubt it . Right now <insert name="" here=""> Mega Corp is making a mockery of tax laws worldwide leading to higher taxes for the plebs whilst they sit on pornographically. huge piles of cash . In terms of what the customer sees then there is little difference between a 1900 catalog service and Amazon . But in terms of tax revenues they are completely different .
|
|
|
|
|
The tax regime in 1900 didn't push Sears to do this. The current tax code in the US is obscene.
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Torrance wrote: ...but took them in Bermuda where there is zero corporation tax ...In terms of what the customer sees then there is little difference between a 1900 catalog service and Amazon . But in terms of tax revenues they are completely different .
Do you know that there was no corporate tax in 1900?
|
|
|
|
|
nope , but never let ignorance get in the way of a damn good rant
|
|
|
|
|
If "local" is worse (less convenient, more expensive, whatever) and can't compete, it deserves to die.
|
|
|
|
|
ECON 101, as I recall. The place where it is marginally most efficient to produce widgets should produce widgets. Any other arrangement creates waste and encourages politicians to redistribute income they've stolen, but never earned.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
rnbergren wrote: What the heck is the difference between buying from Sears via the Mail from 1900 and buying from Amazon via the mail/ups of today?
The difference was that there were many things you could not get locally. Furthermore, delivery in 1900 was not "overnight", so even if you could get something from a catalog, it made a lot more sense to get on your horse and trot into town if you needed something right away.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
You could order a complete house from the Sears catalog.
You can't do that with Amazon.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
