The London Riots...

[Vanir Ausf B]

What are Feng Wangs remidies to that development ?

There aren't any.

Has there been considered things like automation and improved working conditions for this diminishing work force ? Or is the movement of the industries to low labour cost areas the only solution to this "problem" ?

Actually, one upside to it is that Chinese worker wages will rise.

The way I see it the core problem is the fact the markets can not function if it is based on ever expanding market and the regulation of manufacturing costs are based on labour force cost while maintaining the continuously increasing profit margin for the owners. At some point the markets will simply cease to exist because the mass consumption of goods can not happen as the majority of the population simply can not afford to buy even the cheapestly produced product.

When is that going to happen? Western economies have been going for quite a long time without reaching that point.

With regards to China, it doesn't mean their economy will stop growing, it just means it can't maintain the recent level of growth indefinitely.

[Tero]

By Vanir Ausf B

Bushido is my guess.

That would work only for the extremely old who were educated before and right after the war. What about the rest who have been indoctrinated to worship the individuality as defined by the Western culture ?

That was, in fact, my whole point.

Really ? If everybody in China would vanish from the face of the Earth simultaneously what would happen to the capitalist system ?

China is Communist in name only, that is the difference. The means of production is primarily privatized.

How much is privately owned by Chinese alone and operated only to provide for the Chinese market ? What would happen if China nationalized every company overnight ?

[Vanir Ausf B]

What makes you think the problem is solved by replacing the bums with other bums ?

I don't, really.

When was the last time in recent history a change brought on by a peaceful democratic election of the government brought about a real change in the life of masses ?

Is the lesson here that democracy doesn't work?

I think that is the guestion we are trying to answer here. We all think rioting and looting is not the proper solution for the problem. By the same token I think political will has to be able to overrule the "economical imperatives" if the Western society and culture is to survive without violent upheaval. That means that stripping down the government run services funded by tax revenues is detrimental to the development of the Western society. Unless of course the planned development is not what we are being led to believe.

With regards to the United States at least, some stripping down of social services are inevitable. The question really is how much.

Sorry, I forgot you live in the middle of the desert.

I didn't say I lived here alone

[Vanir Ausf B]

That would work only for the extremely old who were educated before and right after the war.

You sure about that?

What about the rest who have been indoctrinated to worship the individuality as defined by the Western culture ?

The Japanese have been indoctrinated to worship individuality? :confused: That's news to me.

Maybe Diesel was right, and it is due to their ethnic and cultural homogeneity.

Really ? If everybody in China would vanish from the face of the Earth simultaneously what would happen to the capitalist system ?

What an odd question.

How much is privately owned by Chinese alone and operated only to provide for the Chinese market ?

I don't know the breakdown of foreign/domestic ownership if that's what you're asking.

What would happen if China nationalized every company overnight ?

Then the Chinese economy would go back to 1979.

[Michael Emrys]

When was the last time in recent history a change brought on by a peaceful democratic election of the government brought about a real change in the life of masses ?

When was the last time a significant improvement in the life of the masses was brought about by violent revolution? The fact is, so far the human race has not yet found a way to eliminate incompetence and corruption from its ranks. There may indeed be a way to get there, but it is going to be a long road, and humanity's predilection for distraction does not inspire confidence.

Michael

[womble]

The middle class has the most to lose when things go tits up. That is why they are the most vocal proponents for preserving the status quo and the prime target for appeacement by the government in power.

Not true. The 'ruling classes' have the most to lose, generally both as individuals and as an aggregate. That's why the middle class have been the prime movers in revolutions since the 18th Century. That is why the government appease the middle class: to stop them getting sufficiently cheesed off as to seek to overthrow. Nowadays, it might not be that the upper class would lose very much, given the way their assets are distributed globally, but they still have zero incentive to want to change "the system".

What makes [Japan] different?

It's been very crowded for centuries. The islands aren't very big and they're very mountainous. Such crowding requires that people be considerate of one another, or it would be intolerable. That's the base root of Japan's formal, cooperative society.

Has there been considered things like automation and improved working conditions for this diminishing work force ?

Chinese factories are pretty much as technically advanced as western ones, when it comes to technological goods, and consumer product engineering. Working conditions can, pretty much, only improve in ways that make the end product more expensive.

[Tero]

By Michael Emrys

When was the last time a significant improvement in the life of the masses was brought about by violent revolution?

Offhand: The French revolution 1789, the Russian revolution of 1918. I would go as far as to claim the US civil war belongs in this cathegory even if is not a revolution.

The fact is, so far the human race has not yet found a way to eliminate incompetence and corruption from its ranks. There may indeed be a way to get there, but it is going to be a long road, and humanity's predilection for distraction does not inspire confidence.

True.

[Tero]

By womble

Not true. The 'ruling classes' have the most to lose, generally both as individuals and as an aggregate. That's why the middle class have been the prime movers in revolutions since the 18th Century. That is why the government appease the middle class: to stop them getting sufficiently cheesed off as to seek to overthrow. Nowadays, it might not be that the upper class would lose very much, given the way their assets are distributed globally, but they still have zero incentive to want to change "the system".

To sum this up: the ruling class needs to appease the middle class who have the most to lose (relatively speaking) and/or the middle class wants to perpetuate the status quo as they have the most to lose (relatively speaking) and the most to gain (relatively speaking).

It's been very crowded for centuries. The islands aren't very big and they're very mountainous. Such crowding requires that people be considerate of one another, or it would be intolerable. That's the base root of Japan's formal, cooperative society.

And that means what when it comes to opportunistic looting ?

Chinese factories are pretty much as technically advanced as western ones, when it comes to technological goods, and consumer product engineering. Working conditions can, pretty much, only improve in ways that make the end product more expensive.

So if the working conditions improve the Chinese lose the appeal as a target for investment ?

[Vanir Ausf B]

Offhand: The French revolution 1789, the Russian revolution of 1918. I would go as far as to claim the US civil war belongs in this cathegory even if is not a revolution.

What makes you think the problem is solved by replacing the bums with other bums ? When was the last time in recent history a change brought on by a peaceful democratic election of the government brought about a real change in the life of masses ?

Then why did you previously state "We all think rioting and looting is not the proper solution for the problem"?

Given your apparent view of history, I don't see how you could have any faith in the political process. If your position is to be internally consistent it seems to me you should be arguing in favor of violent revolution. Otherwise you are perpetuating the status quo; just another middle class guy like me buying the media hype and ignoring the bigger picture

[Michael Emrys]

Offhand: The French revolution 1789, the Russian revolution of 1918. I would go as far as to claim the US civil war belongs in this cathegory even if is not a revolution.

Exactly my point. A century at least, and one can question just how much the Russian revolution benefitted the masses. The recent record has not been good. Mostly it has been a matter of "throw the bums out so our bums can get in".

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

So if the working conditions improve the Chinese lose the appeal as a target for investment ?

Correct. Globalization has largely been a matter of moving investment to where labor is dirt cheap and not unionized. The quality of the labor comes into it, education is important, but that can be made good enough in one generation if the government of a country is dedicated to that goal. The parent company can always send in experts to handle the really tough technical problems, what it needs locally is lots of cheap coolie labor able to learn and perform simple repetitive tasks.

Michael

[Bigduke6]

What makes it attractive to investment, apart from the cheap and docile labour force?

1. An authoritarian government with will to invest, albeit for its own purposes more than because of a deep-seated regard for making life easy for business, in infrastructure. Roads, ports, education, high-tech research which expands the industrial base - all those things are top-down decisions that the government decides on and enforces. This make China worth considering production in; there is not just cheap labor but a growing infrastructure that supports access to (or, if you wish, exploitation of) that labor.

2. A consumer base (population) so large, that even if only a small portion of the Chinese population decides to buy something, in aggregate that's big bucks.

The advantages of investing in China over whatever other fill-in-the-blank developing world nation are pretty clear.

[dieseltaylor]

The great thing about the Chinese is that rulers tend to think long-term rather than 4 yearly election cycles. This is a huge advantage especially when added to guidance to their industry to carry out long-term planning. Hence the friendliness to African nations and strategic rsource buying.

The downside is that the folk generally are short termist and quality is not a highly prized virtue ... until they start looking at German cars. But then that is the wealthy who also do the Burberry thing etc.

[Tero]

By Vanir Ausf B

Then why did you previously state "We all think rioting and looting is not the proper solution for the problem"?

Because ultimately what WE (=middle class people) think does not really matter unless we get massed votes to further "the agenda". Which is never going to be concentratrated enough to matter as the Western lower classes are local and higher classes are global.

Given your apparent view of history, I don't see how you could have any faith in the political process.

The political process is not the problem. The problem is the influence the financial system is excerting on the political system. As it stands the political system is being manipulated by "market forces" which have no vote but still excert the power.

If your position is to be internally consistent it seems to me you should be arguing in favor of violent revolution. Otherwise you are perpetuating the status quo; just another middle class guy like me buying the media hype and ignoring the bigger picture

Me and my sole consumer currency are not alone enough to affect either the status quo OR the violent revolution.

[Tero]

By Michael Emrys

Exactly my point. A century at least, and one can question just how much the Russian revolution benefitted the masses.

Regardless of the actual events the realpolitical status of the Russian pesant did improve as a whole,

The recent record has not been good. Mostly it has been a matter of "throw the bums out so our bums can get in".

Agreed. But if you think that Murdoch could tap into private correspondence for years without any interference and now the British government wants to curtail private correspondence at leasure the message is rather clear.

And rememeber how "it could not happen here" was the chant at the time of the Yugoslavian break up ?