Posted on 12/29/2004 8:59:51 AM PST by lacaprup
The Next Economy By Robert J. Samuelson Wednesday, December 29, 2004; Page A19 We are undergoing a profound economic transformation that is barely recognized. This quiet upheaval does not originate in some breathtaking technology but rather in the fading power of forces that have shaped American prosperity for decades and, in some cases, since World War II. As their influence diminishes, the economy will depend increasingly on new patterns of spending and investment that are still only dimly apparent. It is unclear whether these will deliver superior increases in living standards and personal security. What is clear is that the old economic order is passing.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Most of IT will be outsourced within the next 5 years.
Do you mean for support of the VOIP networks here in the U.S.?
And a "service economy" doesn't create wealth...
It merely redistributes and eventually dissipates wealth as consumption...
It is an economy that in decline,
and policies should be formulated to avoid, rather than encourage, that outcome.
There is another wave set to happen where computers learn how to know their location. The technology is GPS, but the "killer app" has yet to make itself known. One hint is the coming wide acceptance of self steered farm tractors. Lawn mowers will be next.
It may take a bit longer for this digital wave to hit than the internet. But in the end it has the potential to effect an even larger part of our lives.
My point is that this technology will be developed and adopted first in the US. That's what I'm doing for a living now.
The outsourcing "crisis", isn't. The digital economy is just beginning.
It's a set-up story. When it fails to come to fruition by February, they'll run stories about Bush's failure to meet expectations.
Willie, you're so 19th century.
Your statement is true, so long as you define "wealth" as physical stuff that must be manufactured. I don't limit wealth just to stuff. Wealth is whatever it is I want, even the fact that I live in a nice location. The house I live in would be worth one third in many other places. But my "wealth" is tripled because of where my house is.
If I desire a "service", then my acquiring that service increases my wealth. I may not be able to sell it again, if for example that service was entertainment. But I still got something I wanted, and I was willing to trade dollars to get it.
Once you have a roof over your head and food in your mouth, you can define everything else as a "service". Upgrades to your house and fine wines are "services" that I didn't need to survive. And I consider myself wealthier because I have a good house location and more good food that I need.
I'm sure all I've said isn't strictly proper economic theory. But that's my opinion.
The limits of a "service" economy are that it is much harder to trade between people. But because of high technology, the need to trade anything at all to attain the things I realy need is much lower.
If you believe in capitalist theory, then you know that all of this is self-regulating anyway. Once the cost of goods that we want is higher, we will by definition be forced to manufacture tradable goods to exchange for it.
Don't worry, be happy. The world isn't coming to an end.
Gee, narby, where have we heard THAT before???
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
Nothing to kill or die for
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the worldYou, you may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
When my Dad was a kid everyone said that agriculture was important and manufacturing wasn't. Most people have finally come to understand that one tractor factory can make a farm grow what used to come from a hundred farms.
These days a good design consulting firm can increase that tractor factory's output one hundred fold. I'm not holding my breath waiting for widespread applause-- I'll be satisfied that my design firm cuts a tidy profit.
What are you trying to tell us?
That your Dad was born before the Industrial Revolution?
Sometime in the 18th Century perhaps???
BS.
These days lot's of people are swept away by some romantic yearning for our manufacturing past. That's all well and good but the rest of us have to earn a living.
Well if they owed the bank money and had bills to pay, they obviously weren't practicing the self-sufficiency that they preached.
These days lot's of people are swept away by some romantic yearning for our manufacturing past. That's all well and good but the rest of us have to earn a living.
Nothing "romatic" about it whatsoever.
Yeah, you DO have to EARN a living.
You can't do that with a "service economy"
Services merely redistribute and eventually dissipate wealth as consumption.
You need to add-value and create wealth in industries like farming, forestry, construction, manufacturing, mining in order to create goods to TRADE for the goods we import. If you don't, then the service economy merely generates a TRADE DEFICIT, plunging us into debt and bankruptcy, just like your Dad's friends.
Look, I got no problem with the way things are. The mean things you say about my service sector job may make me feel bad but I cry all the way to the bank.
FWIW, for decades engineers like me used to bellyache that our job was considered part of the service sector while our construction and mining projects were considered manufacturing. We got over it.
BTW, just in case we don't get in another argument this week, a very happy new year to you an yours ;-))
There's nothing "Bad" or "Evil" about people who work in the service sector.
While many service jobs may be sneered at because of low-wages and benefits, other service occupations clearly improve our lives tremendously, such as the medical professions. However, the service sector CANNOT provide a foundation for a thriving and prosperous economy. We enjoy those services as a result of engaging competitively in the value-added sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, construction, etc.
Mining is an excellent example: when miner's hit the "mother lode", the town thrives and service occupations boom in the mining town. But when the mine is played out and closes, the service jobs also collapse and a Ghost Town is created. "Service economies" are economies that are in decline. Simple as that.
No it won't. IT is already coming back on shore. Offshoring is a big pain in the ass and requires incredible skills in project management to be done successfully. Most of the companies that seek cost cutting as a method to grow profits are too stupid to effectively manage a project being done in another country, those most of these projects are failing miserably. IT is still doing quite well right here in America and that won't be changing any time soon.
The hell we don't earn our living in the service economy. You know absolutely nothign about it, you never have. You're the most fuill of crap person on FR. You come work 4 80 hour weeks in a row to get a new software package out ontime AND in good quality and tell me again that living isn't earned.
We do add value, we turn random electrons into highly useful software that makes the entire world run smoother. Your beloved trains couldn't get out of their stations if it wasn't for the service economy. A train without a switching system is a crash.
Baloney.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.