Capitalism is War without Violence

One result of technology is suppose to be more free time for people. Technology is suppose to allow for greater productivity which should allow people to work less. But with capitalism, does this theory hold water? Seems like with competition, there's always a need to produce more with less. If company "A" takes 10000 man-hours to generate product "X" and company "B" can generate product "X" in only 5000 man-hours, company "B" will sell "X" for less and will win the market. So company "A" will have to learn how to generate product "X" in less time. Ideally, you work smarter, not longer. But that's easier said then done. In short, in my opinion, the work week and the amount that people have to work will never go down because of technology. It might be less physically demanding work, but it will still be time away from family and away from leisure.

Another way for a company to generate a product for less, is to reduce labor costs. For many years now, companies have been shifting their manufacturing overseas to reduce costs. Now with the new communication and internet technology, it's becoming easier to shift white collar jobs overseas. And with wages averaging 5 to 10 times less in many Asian countries than in the U.S., there is certainly savings to be made. Will high paying white collar jobs keep going overseas?

Most politcians will agree with free trade, and will just lecture about keeping it fair. Seems like trade can never be completely fair when there's so much discrepancy between standards of living around the world. Instead of debating fairness, seems like the only thing the U.S. has that can stop this job flight is American innovation and the economic environment that allows it to prosper.

In the late 1940's, American scientists at Bell Labs invented the transistor. In the 60's and 70's, the integrated circuit was invented in the U.S. These inventions provided the seeds for success of the great American companies like Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco. This is similar to the invention of the automobile assembly line by Henry Ford in the early part of the 20th century.

America's best bet to create high paying jobs is to create new inventions and new industries. Unfortunately, there's a lot of uncertainty of what's possible and what's economical in technology. And competition around the world is tough. Interestingly, Bell Labs licensed the transistor and this gave the start to a Japanese company called Sony, which began using these transistors to make small, low power radios. Also interesting was the fact that the invention of the transistor wasn't realy huge news. Few really appreciated its potential and impact to society.

What is the next great technology? One thing that could have a huge impact, is a new, more efficient energy source. If energy was 10x or 100x cheaper to produce, things that worry people now, would no longer be a concern. For example, fresh water is something that's always a concern in the U.S. and around the world. Most of the world is water, but this water is not fresh water and can't be directly used for farming and consumption. But if energy was 100x cheaper to produce, ocean water could be desalinated. Then it could be pumped anywhere. If energy was really inexpensive, this could be done and its impact around the world would be huge. And if this energy didn't produce carbon dioxide and other pollution, the impact to the future world would even be bigger.

But is a new, cheap, and clean energy source possible? Scientists have been working on fusion for at least 50 years with little progress. Fuel cells have been used since the 60's but remain expensive compared to fossil fuels. Wind and solar generation remain expensive after decades of research. Nuclear fission reactors suffer from radioactive waste. Seems like we are a long ways off from a new and clean energy source that's orders of magnitude cheaper than what we have now. But like the transistor, something may be out there that people don't yet fully understand the potential. If the U.S. can be the inventor of something like this, worry about jobs would fade away for at least a decade. Then we'll need to invent something new and great yet again.

Politics and the Internet

Political campaigns seem to be requiring more and more money. People worry that this need for money is corrupting the political process. In addition to campaign reforms, some argue for more government money to help take out the corrupting influence of money.

But what does this money buy? A lot of the money is used for TV commercials. But how useful are TV commercials? Sure they let people know that you're in the race. But how much information can be given in a 30 second commercial? Hopefully, people are not making decisions based on these.

For very little money, a web site seems like a perfect way for politicians to educate people about their campaigns, their ideas, and the issues. It can provide 100x more information than a 30 second commercial, and everybody with internet access can see it. Some web sites of political candidates have not been much more than their political signs, very static and shallow. But some candidates have impressed me with their sites. Howard Dean's site is one. I'm not really a fan of him, but his web site is impressive. I hope others learn from this and follow in his shoes. In addition to the basics, it has a political blog and a link to a pretty good discussion forum. A discussion forum seems like a perfect way to get people more involved in politics in today's society. There's a lot of work that is required to make sure intelligent discussions takes place on the boards. Also, I don't see the candidates using these. But there's a lot of potential here to educate voters and get them involved without requiring candidates to raise more and more money. The internet should be very good for democracy.

posted by Ken on 1:02 PM permalink and comments  

Post a Comment