Subject: Re: luddites!
From: Brad Parker <brad at heeltoe.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 13:15:00 -0400
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
"Jeff Davis" wrote:
Well, your own example proved the existance of productivity gains - 3 people
with a machine could produce as much as 10 people without the machine, ergo
the 3 people are more productive. If you give 9 of those workers the
machines, and keep 1 around to do maintenance on the machines, the whole group
is nearly 3x as productive.
yes, but what if the 7 people who loose their jobs leave town and the town
goes belly up?
if you measure at the planet level it all probably makes sense, but at a
local level it's not so clear.
20,000 unemployed textile works in NC who won't ever be retrained may
have a better understanding of this effect... (but only in NC).
-brad
I cannot argue with that. Nor did I say that it was pleasent. I will say
that technological change has been responsable for several migrations and
those that didn't now commute a distance that took as many as 3-4 days by
wagon at one time.
The wholesale movement of production from one local to another of far lower
employement is older than automation and has always come with a social and
economic price that automation alone did not always entail. It's very
different to have ones job change then the facility disappear completely.
Allison