Paul Bramscher <pfbram_nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ Paul.Bramscher@xxxxxxxxx ] on Tuesday 20 March 2007 15:25 \__
>>
>>> The whole globalization game is predicated on captive populaces,
>>> divided-and-conquered, unable to offshore the cost of their housing in
>>> the way that corporations can offshore the cost of everything (taxes,
>>> labor, buildings/factories, etc.). It's literally a Western racket,
>>> and not new to globalization.
>>
>> The progression here is simple to see. Those at the top reduce costs by
>> employing cheaper labour -- wherever it may be -- at the expense of the
>> middle class, which is left unemployed. Gates' endeavours to have unlimited
>> visas in the States is either economic suicide or a recipe for return to
>> Medieval Ages.
>
> A bit of both. They're probably banking on, eventually, shifting
> their consumer market (as well as labor market) from the West to the
> East. That is, they're gambling that the Indians and Chinese will
> become the greatest consumers of Microsoft (and perhaps so-called
> American products in general). This is quite unlikely, as linux has
> matured long before M$ has lowered its prices within spitting distance
> on the Indian subcontinent, Asia and Africa.
>
> The OS should be free/open/common-carrier. I have no problem with
> companies/individuals writing linux games, art, even applications for
> a price tag. Let the market decide what wins and loses. But when the
> OS itself is bottled up, even the most idealistic pro-capitalist
> Libertarian (ESR comes to mind) is at a loss.
>
> The funny thing about a neo-medievialism is that people today are
> literate and mobile, population densities are much higher,
> superstition is on the decline, etc. It's clear to me, anyway, that a
> neo-medievialism will fail profoundly, rendering some sorts of
> currency worthless as a critical numerical mass of people simply
> reject its basis wholesale.
Sweet. Roy is bumping his own posts now. Not the first time I might add.
|
|
