Michael S. Lorrey <mike@datamann.com> Wrote:
> and prices were far below profitable levels for many if not most farmers
>(i.e. production exceeded demand).
That's just natures way of telling farmers that you're making too much of something,
if you ignore natures advice you go broke, as well you should.
>And how quickly do you think it would take for them [oil workers] to go into another
>line of work?
I don't know. Perhaps it could happen quickly, or perhaps it would take a long time to teach
them how to make Mr. Fusion machines, if so the fusion industry would be handicapped by
a labor shortage and the demise of the oil business would be delayed.
>Take a look at Russia right now. Its been 10 years since their defense industry
>collapsed (about 50% of their entire economy)
>From an economic viewpoint defense is a drain not a fundamental source of wealth,
it's like paying millions of people to build pyramids or dig holes and then fill them up again.
>and the place is still a shithole.
Russia was always a shithole.
>Any new industry is not going to be burdened, and will not want to be burdened by
>unionized employees.
Maybe, but most "new economy" companies are not unionized and their employees
don't seem to be suffering much. But I don't want to talk about unions, it's just too dull.
>They will automate as much of their manufacturing as possible.
If you're saying that eventually machines will be able to do everything better than
human beings then I agree, but is that really your point, we were after all talking about
1929.
> Would you have invested in CISCO telephone wire routers if you knew that
>another technology was 12 months down the road that would give you 100x
>the capability for the exact same price?
In the real world the company is still managing to find plenty of customers, I grant you that the
technology isn't improving by a factor of a hundred every year, the amount of information
CISCO can send down a line is only doubling every 9 months but the end is not in sight.
>I noticed you deleted my explaination for why they'd be screwed no matter how much
>they wanted to and were capable of building an aircar.
It is my habit to delete as much irrelevant quoted material as I possibly can, unlike certain
people I could name.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:52 MDT