Re: [SLUG-POL] Offshore job movement

From: John Pedersen (john@jmp-systems.com)
Date: Wed Jul 23 2003 - 22:32:30 EDT


>> However, "service" is NOT a "wealth creating" industry. As
>> necessary as it may be to sell insurance, or write programs, or
>> make hamburgers, or give haircuts or paint fingernails, it DOES NOT
>> create anything of value, in the "big picture".
>>
>
>
> I'm not sure where you come up with this evaluation of what
> constitutes "things of value". Anything is of value if people are
> willing to pay for it. Even if it's something like kisses at the
> kissing booth at the state fair. Things that you can hold in your
> hand or drive around aren't the only things "of value". Even piece of
> mind can be "of value" if people are willing to pay for it.
> Doctoring is a service which creates wealth for doctors.
>

I was somewhat imprecise in my wording--sorry.

The premise of the discussion was global, right? To prosper, I maintain
that it is necessary to increase our net wealth, and trade for goods,
etc. When your doctor cures your illness, we're all very happy for you, but
nationally, the net wealth of the nation is unchanged. You simply
transfered some money from your bank to his bank. I get a haircut, same
thing. Your wife gets her nails done. Same thing. That is what a "service
economy" does for you.

When you take a tree, and create some lumber and make a dining room
table, the NET worth of the nation increases. You have something that
WAS NOT
THERE BEFORE. You can take that table and send it to China and get a VCR
in return.

That's the kind of wealth or value I was talking about, and, for the
most part, it boils down to manufacturing. Yes, wheat and tours by
Michael Jackson are in the mix too, but I don't think they are
sufficient to put much of a dent in the $30B to $40B, PER MONTH, trade
deficit. That's B for Billion, as in $30,000,000,000.00, per month. I
haven't
seen trade deficit figures for a while--I assume they're in that ballpark.

Right now, we get our Tivos and shoes and DVD players by trading for paper.
The paper has value simply because we say so, and because other
people (globally) are willing to accept it.

Can we continue indefinitely to print and print and print and the world
will continue to happily accept this paper? Gee, that would be nice. In
that case, why are we even worrying about this silly "jobs" issue?

John



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:25:11 EDT