Community-based economies the answer?

[Martinus]

I think the bigger problem is that as a society - a global society - we can't survive on the current model. Our standard of living is reliant on pretty much slave labor somewhere, and so long as people continue to argue for - and win - better working conditions, at some point, we won't be able to pay for the things we want. The stuff we want will just be too costly to make, and therefore, too costly for the average person to buy it.

So the question is: What gives? Our standard of living or the slave labor? Would buying those things closer to home that we can help with the other stuff, or make it worse? Will it bring in more jobs or lose them?

But we have always relied on slave labor (especially the one defined the way you define it). It's just that in the global economy, your "slave labor" can be located on the other side of the globe. If you bring back the "local economy", you would also bring back "local slave labor", because some people would naturally be unable to afford the costs of this economy, especially as it would be more expensive/inefficient.

[Martinus]

How do you do that, Meri?  How do you make people chose options that are likely to be more expensive?

I don't intend to make anyone do anything. I only asked if there is a way to marry both ideologies. I like the idea of buying locally whenever possible - even if there's a small premium to do so - but I also like being able to use a cellphone (China), drink fine wine (Italian, Australian, German), and eat good chese (France, Belgium).

The question for me is what is the best long-term economic model, and can I have it all in that model?

The problem is that people are going to naturally gravitate toward the cheaper products.  There will be a market for locally grown food, but it tends to be smaller and more expensive.  For instance, Whole Foods.  "Buy local" or simply "Buy American", has been a slogan for decades now.  It hasn't really done much good.  Sure there are few success stories, but they are going against the tide.  The only realistic way of doing these things is trade barriers and tariffs.

The problem that Merri is oblivious to is that her idea (contrary to what she seems to imply) does nothing to address income/wealth inequalities in the local economy. So if you decrease everyone's standards of living  in her "local economy", some people will be destitute. So unless she is planning some radical redistribution, true communism style, I can't see her model not relying on slave labour, only that the poor in that model will be living in the nearby shanty town and not in Shanghai sweatshops.

[Martinus]

To me it sounds like the guy's solution is in desperate search of a problem.

You don't think that our society's economic picture is bleak?

Not really, at least not on pure economic level. The world's economy has hiccups because of financial markets issues but this has very little to do with the state of the market economy, which is doing fine.

[Martinus]

Further, your author fails to recognize the fundamental fact that international trade raises the standard of living for everyone.  He is worse then a protectionist.  He is more like a nihilist.

I have an inkling suspicion that he is just an idiot.

[Martinus]

that isnt the correct question.  Their living standards have improved and continue to improve.  Valmy hit the nail on the head when he said eventually we will run out of surplus low cost labour

China has been stealth-industrializing Africa for the last decade. Plus the industrialization of China and India is only skin-deep - sure, the standard of living has increased but only for a small number of people, there is still a lot of cheap labour left there, it's just this will be rich Chinese exploiting the poor ones. I think the global economy will be fine.

[Martinus]

I don't know enough to consume environmentally, if I could I would.

I find it pretty easy.  I don't eat meat, try not to drive much, live in a mild climate and attempt to suffer bad weather without using the heat, and I use as little plastic as is convenient.  I'd suspect my carbon footprint is 50-75% lower than the average American's.

But I'm rich in self-righteousness.

You disgust me.

[Martinus]

I seem to recall this happening before, with all of us jumping on Meri for unsound ideas.

Vaccines are bad for you. If you listen to your body, you know when to tell it to get rid of tuberculosis or polio on its own.

[Martinus]

Manufacturing is going the same way that agriculture did, an increasingly small number of people will meet our manufacturing requirements. Services, however, there seems to be an insatiable demand for labour here 

Yeah, and here we can expect to see a continuous growth in demand. Yoga instructors, personal trainers, dog walkers, taxi drivers, interior designers etc. We will constantly invent and increase demand for all kinds of jobs like this.

[Martinus]

I hate it when an interesting pile-on discussion happens when I'm asleep, then I have to post like 20 posts in a row.

[Razgovory]

Sweat shops are not slavery.  Stop saying "slave labor".  You might have more traction if you say "cheap labor", but even then it's questionable.  Germany has set itself up as the major manufacturing hub of Europe and exporter of finished goods, and those people aren't slaves.  Western Trade with China is beneficial to both parties.  The Chinese are industrializing and their standard of living is increasing and we get cheaper goods.  The Chinese are much, much better off then they were 40 years ago.

[Martinus]

Sweat shops are not slavery.  Stop saying "slave labor".  You might have more traction if you say "cheap labor", but even then it's questionable.  Germany has set itself up as the major manufacturing hub of Europe and exporter of finished goods, and those people aren't slaves.  Western Trade with China is beneficial to both parties.  The Chinese are industrializing and their standard of living is increasing and we get cheaper goods.  The Chinese are much, much better off then they were 40 years ago.

Well that's an expression Merri used - I qualified it by saying I use the term "slave labour" the way she seems to mean it. Also, I tried to avoid a pointless discussion about the pros and cons of slavery.

[Warspite]

CBA to read all the posts from the beginning, but here are my thoughts why the OP is misguided:

First, "community-based" economies already exist to the extent that they are viable. I go across the road to get my hair cut, or my pictures framed, or to use the gym (services). But it does not make sense for my urban locality to also have to produce TV sets, computers and food: these things are all made better and more cheaply (and, in fact, probably to lower net CO2 emissions) by specialised labour and production facilities much further away from me. This is the essence of trade. And it just depends on how you define "community". Free market liberals traditionally view the globe as the ideal trading community.

Second, the idea that cheap labour is wrong is based upon some basic flawed assumptions and, worse, patronising or romantic idealism. As long as labour is freely given and contracts to do so freely entered in to, there is no ethical difference between the wage level in Germany to that of China. Where you can make an argument is that certain labour standards that we like are not adhered to (for instance, the banning of unions which, no matter your opinion of them, is the denial of a fundamental freedom of association). The quest against cheap labour however is often a thinly disguised political objective to protect industries in marginal constituencies that are no longer competitive.

The thought that industrialising economies playing a massive game of economic catch up (see comparative GDP per capita levels) should somehow arrive at post-industrial wage levels matching the highly educated Western world's overnight is far-fetched if not silly.

[Iormlund]

The next economic model will include robots. Tons of them.

[Phillip V]

The next economic model will include robots. Tons of them.

I hope so. It would relieve me of sexual harassment lawsuits.

[Eddie Teach]

I hope so. It would relieve me of sexual harassment lawsuits.

Until the Robot Rights movement succeeds and then you're back at square 1.