Jobs Lost to India Aftermath 900

You're entirely wrong as to the gist of my post.

What I'm getting at is something more like this: WE--in the US--saw our standard of living greatly increase in the prewar period, such that the disparity between us and abroad became greater. WE should have seen that ultimately, as economies globalized and transportation became cheaper, that it would put out labor market at risk. Where ever there is someone willing (and eager) to work for like 50 cents a day, there will be strong downward pressure on wages.

Your arguments about currencies and such are valid, but, in my view, only a layer over this underlying reality. If I'm making circa $100 day, and there is someone who can do my job for ~ $.10-day (4 orders of magnitude difference), changes in currency valuations--unless they are catastrophic--will just be perturbations on that core reality.

In my view, we--in the west, in the US--should have taken a more global view about industrialization, especially post WWII.

I'm not blaming the people in poor countries. Just the opposite, I'm blaming US for being so selfish and not seeing that what goes on in the rest of the globe ultimately effects us. If I'm saying anything to you, I guess it would be a similar warning. India is making great strides now, yes. But if you move far enough you will eventually be at risk in the same way we are. Where that risk will come from, who knows. But there are still billions of desparately poor people on this planet, so it can go on a long time before it starts to level off.

Well, I'm not so sure of that. I wasn't talking details anyhow. And it is possible to have high levels of poverty without having rock bottom labor costs (just look at US inner cities for example). Obviously in the details it is complicated. What I'm saying is that the fundamental, underlying cause is the disparity in standards of living globally, thats all.

You are right on on that one. The only silver lining in our lives since the 70s has been the availability of incredibly cheap electronics. I won't buy into it on cars though. Better, maybe. But much, much more expensive. Arguably, the high cost of cars (and gas) is one of the structural problems holding back the US labor market. If I could live without a car I might be able to do with almost 25% less in income. It is that bad.

Again, you have me just backward.

My point was that when people see their standard of living decline--even relative to what they exptected--they get angry. I'm suggesting that our military adventures could be seen as an irrational extension of that common-worker angst. I'm not saying it is right, just suggesting that it is a part of the problem.

Brian