On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 22:45:25 -0600, Prometheus wrote:

On 18 Nov 2006 14:30:10 GMT, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 00:00:41 -0600, Prometheus wrote:

On 17 Nov 2006 14:00:12 GMT, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 05:10:35 -0600, Prometheus wrote:

I'm with you on the "service economy" nonsense- I don't think that even
includes maintenance in most cases. As far as I can tell, it's
referring to short-order cooks and shelf stockers, though I have to hope
for all our sakes that it means something else.

Hate to tell you but it most assuredly does include maintenance. IBM
considers itself to be a service company and is considered to be part of
the service economy, and if you've ever had anything fixed under an IBM
service contract you'll know they're serious about it. Doctors and lawyers
and most other "professions" are providing services. If it's not making
something or moving something then it's probably a service.

Nope- never had anything fixed by IBM. I guess I was thinking of the
FANUC maintenance guys that all seem to be from other parts of the
world (at least going by the very thick accents I've heard from most
of them, though YMMV) and the delightful Indian voices that answer the
phones whenever I try to get a problem with just about anything
resolved.

Here's the problem with doctors and lawyers as the basis of an
economy, though- it's too circular and localized.

"Doctors and lawyers" are not the only examples. Try to _think_ about
this. Mechanics, plumbers, electricians, painters, carpenters, all of
those are in part "service sector".

I guess to my mind, the trades are not part of a "service sector",
because they produce tangible goods as an end result- Though I can
see your argument, and if that is what people are referring to when
speaking of the service sector, then I'm a little more comfortable
with the idea.

Trades go both ways--the plumber who's plumbing new construction is part
of the construction industry, but the same guy when he fixes your sink is
service sector.

While they're jobs
that pay well and are valuable in their own right, not everyone can do
them. We're not (as far as I know) outsourcing medical personnel and
legal advice to other countries on any signifigant basis.

We aren't outsourcing plumbers either. If it's a job that has to have a
warm body on-site and the site can't be moved then it can't be
outsourced. You can outsource camera repair--shipping a camera to
Elbonia costs peanuts--but shipping an 18-wheeler to Elbonia for repair
is hardly a viable proposition.

Hence the
comment about cooks and stockers- those are the service industry jobs
that the great majority of displaced factory workers are doing, and
they do little or nothing to bring money into our country. When those
people were making things, money was coming in- now, it's going out.

The only jobs that "bring money into our country" are jobs involving
exportation. Since the US is the largest single economy in the world
(four times the size of the next largest national economy and about the
size of the entire EU put together) it's little wonder that more gets
imported than exported. You want to "bring money into the country" then
bring the rest of the world up to the US standard so that they can all
afford our goods.

All right, how about we rephrase my original rant to "keep money in our
country.". The same basic principle applies in either case, and if
I'm wrong, I wouldn't mind being enlightened about this, as the "service
economy" seems to me like a buzzword concept used to justify a whole lot
of things done to increase quarterly profits that aren't necessarily in
our best interests. Might be a load off my mind if I can see the
underlying nuts and bolts of how it is supposed to work.

I know that I have a very simplified version of the system, but
sometimes there is a virtue inherant in simplicity that is only
complicated by spin. So if you can tell me where the reasoning is
flawed, I'll be happy to listen.

Here's what I figure-

If we are making things from our own (or imported) raw materials, we add
value to them by virtue of the manufacturing process- a finished pulley
is more useful and valuable than a raw lump of iron ore, right?

If we are moving finished product from elsewhere around, we are adding
cost to them, but the value is unchanged, correct?

As a by-product of the manufacturing process, we give local people a way
to earn an income, and those people spend that income locally- which in
turn supports those people who are providing services rather than goods.

As an added benefit, we know that those products are produced under the
regulations of our social contract, and that in buying them, we are not
supporting child labor, forced labor, or the wholesale destruction of
another area of the world's environs.

We also have an advantage in times of war, when international trade
becomes more complex and difficult. If we make most things inside of
our own borders, we have a renewable supply source for our armies. This
does not just include munitions, but things like cookpots, shoes,
clothing, and computers- along with anything else an army or our own
population requires.

What we're seeing now is that much of our manufacturing has already been
outsourced to Asia- China in particular. While I have nothing in
particular against the Chinese (indeed, I really like the ones I have
met, and enjoy thier food and cinema,) their (if I may remind you)
communist government has not always been on the best terms with our own.

Much of our manufacturing of _what_? Our manufacturing of cars and
airplanes hasn't been outsourced to China. Certainly we get a lot of
plumbing supplies and other low-tech items. Woodworking machines
apparently, but how many Chinese made machine tools do you see on factory
floors?

China is the #1 ally of North Korea, who has recently declared itself a
nuclear power, and has detonated a nuclear device- following that action
with the declaration that it will attack our country with their new
weapons if we pursue any punitive actions against them for it, including
international economic sanctions. If that happens, I don't see us
apolgizing to Kim Jong Il, and laying down arms- it's far more likely to
result in total war against the North Koreans.

I suspect that if the North Koreans actually use a nuclear weapon on
_anybody_ they're going to find the Chinese Army across their border
faster than they can say "Kimchee".

Saying that China is the #1 ally of North Korea is kind of like saying
that a remora is the #1 ally of a great white shark--it's not that
they're good friends so much as that North Korea doesn't _have_ any
friends.

While China may not choose N.K. over the US market, we cannot know for
certain that that will always be the case- especialy if the US uses a
ham-fisted unilateral approach to subduing the Korean threat. If that,
or another, incident brings us into an armed conflict with China at some
point in the future, we're no longer going to have the huge discount on
imported Chinese goods that we enjoy today.

If the North Koreans nuke anything belonging to the US and the US nukes
back, I suspect that the Chinese will do a little posturing and secretly
heave a sigh of relief that they don't have to worry about those idiots
in Korea anymore.

So where are we then? We do not control China. They can do basically
anything they like- despite our military strength. They control over
1/6 of the world's total population, and most of the means of
production. We might eventually win a war against them, but it would
surely hurt us- a lot.

Uh, China hardly controls "most of the means of production". If they did
then _they_ would be the world's largest economy instead of being half the
size of Japan.

Sure, we could rebuild American manufacturing capabilities- but why wait
until it's do or die time? We can compete with the rest of the world-
one American with modern equipment can produce as many finished goods in
one shift as a village full of rural Indians (for example) can in a
week's worth of toil with hand tools.

What makes you think that that village full of Indians is using hand
tools? If the US could compete with the Chinese making low-tech goods
then we would be doing so. Simple fact is that it just plain doesn't take
all that much expertise to make pipe nipples, and for that kind of product
in that kind of volume there isn't any "high tech" solution that will
significantly reduce costs.

What I don't understand is why we don't. We send away our equipment,
materials, and expertise.

And get paid for it.

And after years of this, we're coming to the
state where there are is a majority of people who can run a cash
register with pictures on the buttons- but can't read a tape measure.
These are the people who will need to learn to produce tangible goods
when it becomes necessary- it may not be that hard to train someone to
deburr a part, or reload a shell, but it takes time and money to teach
someone to act independantly to adjust offsets in a CNC controller or
use instruments to maintain quality levels.

Don't get me started on education.

Don't believe the lie- we're not all going to be doctors, lawyers,
rock-stars or famous actors.

And when the US was a manufacturing economy we weren't all Andrew Carnegie
or John D. Rockefeller, most of us were working on an assembly line
for low wages or providing services to those who were.

Nobody on this list is likely to be
President some day, and few of us are going to be rich. Anyone that
punches a time clock every day should understand that at a viseral
level. The sucessful are always held up as examples for everyone else-
and there is nothing wrong with that, but that doesn't mean that every
Joe six-pack is going to make it there. To him, the "service economy"
probably means that he's going to be bagging groceries (if anywhere
still does that) instead of running a press- and probably for a lot less
money and self esteem. Good thing there's cheap Chinese stuff at the
discount store for him to buy, so he can furnish his trailer and still
buy anti-depressants, right?

If he can't find anything else to do then perhaps he'll be bagging
groceries, but most of the grocery baggers I've seen lately have been as
the politically correct expression goes "intellectually challenged".

There are many alternatives to being doctors and lawyers. What do doctors
and lawyers _need_? Give them that and you'll make a living.

If all you know how to do is run a press and there aren't any presses then
you have to learn to do something else. The problem there is not that
there are no jobs but that he doesn't have the skills to get them.

In the 1950s, a guy could work in a manufacturing job and use that money
to buy a house, own a car, and support his family- while his wife stayed
at home and took care of the kids. (I don't care if women are working
or not- that's not my point.) Can we really say that the rise of the
"service economy" has improved the lives of the middle class?

People working on an assembly line today aren't making all that much
either. And yet there seem to be plenty of people around with money for
houses and Hummers.

Both I
and my wife work full time- I as skilled trade labor, and she as
unskilled factory labor, and barely keep our heads above water- without
any children to look after. If one or both of us were depending on the
income from service jobs, we'd be forced out of our home within six
months.

From _what_ "service jobs"? If you're looking for a service job that you
can get with no training or experience you're going to find yourself on
the bottom of the ladder. Your problem there is not that you're being
forced into a "service job" but that you're unskilled labor. Try to make
ends meet on the kind of manufacturing job you can get with no training or
experience and you'll find that the situation isn't any shinier.

Most people I know are so far in debt (including professionals
in the much touted "service sector") that they're choosing between
decent food, gasoline, or an ever growing credit-card balance on any
given week. If that's what this brave new world brings us, I think we
have a right to question it.

The inability of a given individual to manage his own finances has nothing
to do with the "service economy". Professionals are deep in debt mostly
because of the loans they had to take out to get their education and start
their business, not because the pay is low. In any case, none of the
physicians I know are making such choices.

What I'm advocating here is not rocket science, but it does require a
bit of education amongst our population. I'd like to see vocational
education restored to our public schools,

To what purpose if there are no "vocational" jobs?

and people at least making an
attempt to support American manufacturers and products. That doesn't
mean you can't buy toilet paper at the Walmart- just don't buy
everything from China. As long as we retain some manufacturing
capabilites, we have a pool of workers and experience to draw from if we
need it- and it's likely that some day we will.

So where can one buy a Chinese car anyway?

If we produce and enhance weath here, wealth is what we have. If just
move money around on computers, it will eventually all be in the pockets
of people on foreign soil.

And their wages will increase and eventually we'll be able to compete in
the low-tech manufacturing sector again.

All the money in the world won't buy even a box of nails if there is
no one around to make them.

And if you insist on making them locally when they can be made for a
tenth the price in Elbonia all you do is price your goods out of the
world market.

Why do we need to be in an unbalanced world market? Why not impose
tariffs on foreign importers who abuse their workers, and only allow
free trade with those who increase the standard of living for thier
populations?

Fine, impose tariffs. What do you think that will accomplish other than
that they'll impose tariffs back and we'll be able to export even less
than we do now.

I've heard the argument that a rising tide raises all ships- but I don't
believe it is true. Seems more like it raises the ocean liners, and
sinks the fishing boats.

Services are important, sure- but given the choice between that or
food, clothing and housing, I'll choose the physical requirements for
survival first every time.

Housing? Construction is one industry that cannot be outsourced--you
need warm bodies on site to build something. As for food, you were
complaining earlier about "cook" as line of work.

A cook is not the same thing as a manufacturing plant that processes raw
food and grain into finished product.

So other than ethnic specialties what "finished product" commonly sold in
the US is imported?

Hell... I've even been hearing radio ads about a new "exciting and
rewarding career opportunity" selling crap on eBay. Didn't anyone
learn the lessions of the first internet bubble? We can't all be
rich, and we can't all be peddlers- somebody has to produce wealth in
the first place.

What does snake oil have to do with anything? There are always radio
ads about get-rich-quick schemes.

The whole damn country is being continually sold snake oil in shiny
packages.

Such as?

No matter how far our society progresses, and how different it
becomes, we will always need the basics- I don't know about you, but I
am not comfortable with the idea of everything I need to survive being
produced in another country.

"Everything you need to survive"? What specific item that you "need to
survive" is produced in another country?

Textiles.

Thats news to Malden Mills. Yes, there are many imported textiles
but that does not mean that there is no US textile industry.

Gasoline/heating oil.

This may come as a shock to you, but the US doesn't have enough oil in the
ground to meet our needs on an ongoing basis--we could run for a while on
the strategic oil reserve but that is there for the war scenario that you
seem to be worried about. There isn't anything that can be done about
this except to stop using oil.

Tools.

What tools? "Tools" covers a huge range of products. Are you talking
about hammers or about semiconductor fabrication lines?

Building materials (though most of those come from Canada in my area,
and I'm comfortable with that)

So let's see, we import Douglas Fir from China? Do tell.

Cooking utensils.

Well, let's see, in my kitchen the crappy stuff says "China" and the good
stuff "Toledo, Ohio" on the bottom.

Food (some, not all of it)

Well, now, the US doesn't have the climate to grow bananas and if you want
fresh fruit in the winter you don't have a lot of choice. The US has
_always_ imported a certain amount of food, but the US exports far more
than it imports.

Electronic/communication components.

I'm sorry, but I don't put this under the heading of stuff I need to
survive. I remember when the only "communication components" in the house
were one telephone.

Those are a few examples, and there are probably better ones. The short
and non-specific answer is "almost everything."

Look- I know that I could get together a pile of scrap metal, make my
own knives and axes from it, and eke out the bare necessities for life
by hunting and foraging for my own food and cutting down trees for heat
and shelter, but that's not what I mean by "needs" in a modern world.

Why would you want to do such a thing?

Like I said, I'm open to a clear explaination of how American services
produce tangible wealth. It's quite possible that I'm entirely wrong,
and I'm more than willing to learn something new here that might help me
sleep a little better at night.

The same way that Chinese manufacturing produces tangible wealth. You
find something that somebody is willing to pay for and you provide it.

Especially when we've got a government and citizenry that seems to
think that the rest of the world doesn't matter at all, and we can
treat anyone and everyone else like **** with impunity.

So which is it, does it matter or doesn't it? Sounds to me like you want
to close the US borders to all foreign trade and let the rest of the world
go hang.



--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt