NYT Expose On Chinese Working Conditions In Apple Factories - Microeconomic Help Please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tttppp

Education, housing, healthcare, auto, planes all shitty industries because of government involvement.

---

Read Steven's comment for a moment, it's NOT government but the PRIVATE SECTOR is making things better in China, government-substituted systems are costing more while private systems are getting cheaper & better.

Why do you think politicians & bureaucrats have much incentive to improve things? They can ROB (tax & inflate) the people, so there's very little incentive for them to do any good to raise standards. People in the private sector have profit-incentive, they compete for profit amongst themselves, government can just TAKE money, it doesn't have to work a lot to earn it that's why communism/socialism fails. As far as the living standards go, if government weren't STEALING so much money out of the economy by way of taxes & debt, & putting crippling "regulations" only to protect big lobbying companies & crush the little guys then it would be much much better than it is right now so of course, the problem is government. :(

Again, you keep missing the point, it's NOT about "money", it's about resources - goods & services (REAL WEALTH), the more there are the higher living-standards people will experience - & the only way to ensure that is to allow those people who produce goods & services to keep their profits & re-investing it to produce even more & so on. Again, if someone could just take money "legally" or otherwise, they've no incentive to be very productive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steven Douglas

Can you explain why, generally speaking even, that computers are cheaper, better, more powerful, more efficient, etc., every year, while education and health care are cost prohibitive without insurance for most? In China the cost of both non-subsidized education and non-subsidized health care went steadily down while I was there, while the subsidized versions of each are either stable or slightly rising, but only modestly. What is it that prevents education and health care from following the same pattern as computers in America and their education and health care counterparts in China?

Let me answer that: There is NO SUCH THING as a free market in the States where education and health care are concerned. Not even close. Both education and health care are special interests to the core - highly protectionist/protected, deliberately overly complicated, with layers upon layers of corrupt entities on the take, and heavily subsidized in the States, way, WAY more than in China. The number of doctors that can be admitted into practice is not controlled by Chinese authorities. If everyone wanted to be a doctor, nothing would stop a glut of doctors in China. And that's happening, because labor competition is so fierce in China that a four year degree is their equivalent to a high school diploma in terms of where it will get you in the workplace.

Think we'll let many of those Chinese doctors into our borders to compete with our spoiled bastard children of the AMA? Fat chance. Only a token few. My doctor in China made house calls. Our doctors did that, once upon a time in a different America. Easily affordable, too, out of pocket. And I'm not rich, and neither was my Chinese doctor, who was EXTREMELY good, but also faced a LOT of healthy competition. Like normal people do in a free market.

Private, non-subsidized hospitals: all modern facilities, with highly competent physicians:

Medical Record workbook for the doctor to fill out: .50 cents
X-Rays $20
Blood tests - $9
MRI - $46
Antibiotics and painkillers - $8

That was one of my visits. Take all your records, including your X-rays and MRI results, with you when you go - they don't store that crap for you, it's yours. It's very strange. Very surreal. Eye-popping actually, to see medicine practiced in a free market. In "communist" China.

Oh, and want your whole mouth rebuilt, with dental implants from Swiss trained Chinese oral surgeons? You'll be lucky if you pay more than $2K for a whole mouth rebuild - everything included. For about the price of a single implant, or a couple of root canals and a single crown in the states.

Yeah, you can pretty much destroy our education and health care systems and start over from scratch. Import the shit out of it from overseas. Flood our bloated, corrupt, insane market. I don't see any other way, it's definitely not fixable. Both are cases of Social Engineering Insanity Gone Wild.

EDIT: I made arrangements last month for my cousin to go to China to get some medical attention AND a full mouth rebuild. He was quoted $26,000 in California (cheapest quote out of three) for his dental work. He has no medical or dental insurance. He'll be staying in Wuxi on a tourist visa for a little less than a month. But he's going to China with about $6K at his disposal, about what it will take for the cost of a visa, round trip airfare, food and lodging, a full mouth rebuild, AND full medical attention. At a small fraction of what it would have cost to rebuild his mouth here - and forget the medical, there's no way that's happening here.

---

+1

Good piece :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paul Or Nothing II

Read Steven's comment for a moment, it's NOT government but the PRIVATE SECTOR is making things better in China, government-substituted systems are costing more while private systems are getting cheaper & better.

---

how are you disagreeing with him that costs have gone up in the US due to government involvement?

And, if you agree with him, do we expect ALL AND ANY countries with less government, to have better or cheaper services of those mentioned above?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paul Or Nothing II

Read Steven's comment for a moment, it's NOT government but the PRIVATE SECTOR is making things better in China, government-substituted systems are costing more while private systems are getting cheaper & better.

Why do you think politicians & bureaucrats have much incentive to improve things? They can ROB (tax & inflate) the people, so there's very little incentive for them to do any good to raise standards. People in the private sector have profit-incentive, they compete for profit amongst themselves, government can just TAKE money, it doesn't have to work a lot to earn it that's why communism/socialism fails. As far as the living standards go, if government weren't STEALING so much money out of the economy by way of taxes & debt, & putting crippling "regulations" only to protect big lobbying companies & crush the little guys then it would be much much better than it is right now so of course, the problem is government. :(

Again, you keep missing the point, it's NOT about "money", it's about resources - goods & services (REAL WEALTH), the more there are the higher living-standards people will experience - & the only way to ensure that is to allow those people who produce goods & services to keep their profits & re-investing it to produce even more & so on. Again, if someone could just take money "legally" or otherwise, they've no incentive to be very productive.

---

How am I missing the point? You obviously have not read my prior posts. I argued for all industries to be deregulated and allow the free market to work. I was criticizing our government for creating a system is which companies are not allowed to do business unless they run their business the way the government would. For some reason you are trying to lecture me that the free market is better than the government. I already made that point, why are you lecturing me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tttppp

How am I missing the point? You obviously have not read my prior posts. I argued for all industries to be deregulated and allow the free market to work. I was criticizing our government for creating a system is which companies are not allowed to do business unless they run their business the way the government would. For some reason you are trying to lecture me that the free market is better than the government. I already made that point, why are you lecturing me?

---

now that we got that out of the way, please respond to my "way off" numbers, or give me your own.

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onlyrp

I could answer by first asking "How about you tell me first what is BETTER OFF"

But I'll answer you, you want numbers?
This is not my personal experience alone, but at least a dozen people I personally know living in my area.
I agree with you no matter how much you cut your living expense, you need a house and food. But car and clothes do not need to be bought every month.
We'll start with cars, since you are obsessed with it being $20,000-40,000 without better fuel efficiency. Most of the people I am speaking of spent less than $10,000 on their past 2 cars (together, including any repairs). Most of our cars are 5 years old when we buy, and last very well for another 5, they cost less than $5000 to buy.
So that's a start, 10 years, 2 cars, $10,000 total. If you insist you must have 2 cars costing $20,000 each, or $40,000 , that's your problem.

Housing? Single bed apartments cost typically $1000-1400 in populated areas.
We live in suburbs, if it's not shared, it's a studio. So we sacrifice either size or convenience, sometimes the luxury of safe neighborhoods.
Rent is now $700 max for us, it's fluctuated up and down, but never past $1000 without either a better location or a bigger space.

Food, we eat on less than $200 a month. No junk food snacks, doesn't include soda or alcohol. We're not vegetarians, just smart shoppers.

Utilities, electricity, water, gas add up to less than $100 a month. If you're low income you may get assistance, but we don't. Cable, internet and cellphones are not necessities or basics.

So there you have it, BASICS cost less than $1000 a month. (and this is suburbs of southern California, it gets even better if you lived in foreclosureville, but that'll make income harder to find as well)
Even the lowest income among us makes $1200 net a month, leaving him $200 extra in he needs to buy gasoline for travel.
So what did I forget to include that is either basic or necessity? Anybody who has told us they can't make a living or get the basics without making $30,000 a year, has conceded and admitted after just looking at their numbers that they only "can't" because they CHOSE TO DEMAND MORE.

Medical care, that's the hard part, I concede that is expensive today and hard to have access to. Education is also optional.
(many of us are taking risks because we don't have any health coverage, but we get by, if you consider than a basic or necessity, fine)
YOUR TURN.

Hey, I'll make it easier for you. I'll give you the benefit of doubt that my numbers are way underestimated and you can't possibly get what we do. I'll DOUBLE MINE. Can you live on $2000 a month? If not, please list me what great basics you can't pay for.

---

In my last job I was making roughly $50,000 year and was saving less than $10,000 year. The only thing I spent money on that wasn't a necessity was cable and internet. I don't know about you but but making $10,000 year for my personal use doesn't really motivate me to work. Especially considering the student loans I have to pay off, $10,000 does add up to much.

My parents used to make over $150,000 combined, and were able to save more money. But after putting 3 kids through college they aren't even going to be able to afford to retire.

Of the people I worked with who made similar salaries to me, none of them were able to save any money. Although most of them did waste their money.

The majority of kids I went to school with were not able to find decent jobs getting out of school, and had to live with their parents. Roughly 20 years of school should ensure that most kids are able to find adequate work and be able to move out on their own.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radi...-apple-factory

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tttppp

In my last job I was making roughly $50,000 year and was saving less than $10,000 year. The only thing I spent money on that wasn't a necessity was cable and internet. I don't know about you but but making $10,000 year for my personal use doesn't really motivate me to work. Especially considering the student loans I have to pay off, $10,000 does add up to much.

My parents used to make over $150,000 combined, and were able to save more money. But after putting 3 kids through college they aren't even going to be able to afford to retire.

Of the people I worked with who made similar salaries to me, none of them were able to save any money. Although most of them did waste their money.

The majority of kids I went to school with were not able to find decent jobs getting out of school, and had to live with their parents. Roughly 20 years of school should ensure that most kids are able to find adequate work and be able to move out on their own.

---

Be a little specific, what do you mean "saving $10,000 a year"? Do you mean, all expenses paid, $10,000 was saved into your bank account unspent each year? If so, how is that not more than necessities?

How did you end up spending $40,000 a year? (I understand taxes take out about 13,000)

You just identified your problem, you're not motivated to work unless you are paid what you want, too bad. I'll keep working and saving, you can stop working and see who wants to bail you out.

How much did 3 kids going to college cost? I hope they were all worthy majors (sounds like you guys went to college on a combination of savings and loans) Looks like you admitted most people just waste their money, so what's to complain? You can't say "waste" until you've taken care of your basics and necessities. So you're still not telling me how you're unable to afford basics, and/or how we're worse off than 1912.

Roughly 20 years of school? First 12 is mandatory, therefore doesn't help you get ahead of the crowd. What really counts is the last 4, or last 8, and that's optional. As for your attitude about "why don't I make enough, why can't I move out" you pretty much admitted it's all the choices you made.

So, please tell me , more specifically, how did you end up spending $27,000 of your salary? (I used $50,000 - 13,000 income tax, - 10,000 you said you saved). I'm not going to let you go so easily, though you've already admitted you were able to save up some money, and others who did not, were simply wasteful. But I'm willing to look at more detail, how did you end up spending $20,000-25,000 for living, were they all and only basics and necessities?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onlyrp

Be a little specific, what do you mean "saving $10,000 a year"? Do you mean, all expenses paid, $10,000 was saved into your bank account unspent each year? If so, how is that not more than necessities?

How did you end up spending $40,000 a year? (I understand taxes take out about 13,000)

You just identified your problem, you're not motivated to work unless you are paid what you want, too bad. I'll keep working and saving, you can stop working and see who wants to bail you out.

How much did 3 kids going to college cost? I hope they were all worthy majors (sounds like you guys went to college on a combination of savings and loans) Looks like you admitted most people just waste their money, so what's to complain? You can't say "waste" until you've taken care of your basics and necessities. So you're still not telling me how you're unable to afford basics, and/or how we're worse off than 1912.

Roughly 20 years of school? First 12 is mandatory, therefore doesn't help you get ahead of the crowd. What really counts is the last 4, or last 8, and that's optional. As for your attitude about "why don't I make enough, why can't I move out" you pretty much admitted it's all the choices you made.

So, please tell me , more specifically, how did you end up spending $27,000 of your salary? (I used $50,000 - 13,000 income tax, - 10,000 you said you saved). I'm not going to let you go so easily, though you've already admitted you were able to save up some money, and others who did not, were simply wasteful. But I'm willing to look at more detail, how did you end up spending $20,000-25,000 for living, were they all and only basics and necessities?

---

I don't remember the cost breakout. All I remember is I made about $50,000 and saved less than $10,000, when the only major non-basic thing I had was cable, internet, and phone. I also had student loans. I think it was $30,000-$40,000. So if I spent all my savings toward paying back my loans it would take 3-4 years just to break even.

I never said we're worse off than 1912. I said we are not significantly better than 1912. In 1912 a full days worth got you just enough of the basics for you to afford to make it back to work the next day. The same is true today. 80% of my salary should not go to taxes and the basics. It should be the other way around. Roughly 80% of my salary should go to me, and I should decide on how to spend or save it.

Of all the people I know, everyone makes a salary, and I can only think of one who makes a significant amount more than their expenses...this person only got that way because she worked her way towards the top of a company. Which is what I said happens to a few people. A small percentage of people who either work their way to the top of a company or start their own company and have success can have much more than the basics. But this is basically just a small percentage of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tttppp

I don't remember the cost breakout. All I remember is I made about $50,000 and saved less than $10,000, when the only major non-basic thing I had was cable, internet, and phone. I also had student loans. I think it was $30,000-$40,000. So if I spent all my savings toward paying back my loans it would take 3-4 years just to break even.

I never said we're worse off than 1912. I said we are not significantly better than 1912. In 1912 a full days worth got you just enough of the basics for you to afford to make it back to work the next day. The same is true today. 80% of my salary should not go to taxes and the basics. It should be the other way around. Roughly 80% of my salary should go to me, and I should decide on how to spend or save it.

Of all the people I know, everyone makes a salary, and I can only think of one who makes a significant amount more than their expenses...this person only got that way because she worked her way towards the top of a company. Which is what I said happens to a few people. A small percentage of people who either work their way to the top of a company or start their own company and have success can have much more than the basics. But this is basically just a small percentage of people.

---

Let me know when you remember. Because it matters.
How much do you think cable, internet and phone cost you a year? $1000? $2000?
You still have to account for how you managed to spend close to $40,000.
So until you do, and can, I suggest you not complain.

"I never said we're worse off than 1912."
So you purposely wasted my time asking me to explain to you how we're better today than 1912?
Or what did you mean when you said we work more hours for less today and are better off in a communsit country?

What is 80%? A flat rate for all salaries even if you made minimum wage? So if I made minimum wage I should spend my basics and still keep 80%?
Yes, it's rare to be smart and responsible, but you can go with the crowd, or choose something better, if you want. If spending upfront makes you happier, why save?