Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by route66 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

route66

> then I have to look elsewhere

Where, exactly, in a world of reduced job opportunities?

> ... side benefits ...... workout midday..., , ...walk in the park ...

For the people in question these pastimes are probably as realistic as having a Rhino shooting in Namibia.

> ... A portion...

You make it seem like a beautiful win-win situation, like a well deserved 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 ... + 0.1 split. The current discussion revolves, among other things, around the question if it's more like 0.99 + 0.01 and if that is like it should be.

With a reasoning like yours, I always wonder if there is indeed some underlying substance to it, or if it's sheer hope and faith in some Austrian god?

View on HN

As a consumer I've definitely experienced the benefits of declining labor costs. I can buy a computer today for less than 1/4 what my mother paid for 1/100th the power (when I was a child). Cars have gotten more fuel efficient, powerful, comfortable, safe etc, but I barely pay more than my parents did for a comparable 5yr old car in the 80s (FTR: 1984 Prelude in 1989 for $10k , 2008 Mazda3 GT in 2013 for $13k), so on and so forth for most of the goods that come to mind.

Practically, everyone with a pension benefits from profits in the stockmarket; that's how someone is able to pay a nonworking person (a retired senior) $1000s a month in benefits.

A walk in the park is free, reading a book from a library is similarly inexpensive, ok so they wont get to do some expensive pass times, but enjoyable things nonetheless.

I never said it was an even split, but that each of the parties get some. Theres plenty of substance and I'm unaware of any Austrian gods.

> Cars have gotten more fuel efficient, powerful, comfortable, safe etc, but I barely pay more than my parents did for a comparable 5yr old car in the 80s

You think the is the result of declining labour costs? I'm pretty sure mechanical engineers' wages have not decreased since the 1980s.

Imagine a situation in which someone in 1980 is paid a premium price to build a premium product. Say a automobile with heated seats, electronic door locks and AC... Then in 2014 it has migrated from high end (and premium paid) labor to being common place and performed by low end (and marginally paid) labor..

To me that situation is a decline in labor prices, despite the low end worker in 2014 making more in absolute terms than the 1980 worker.

A 2nd analogy, If I make 10 widgets an hour and earn $10 an hour in 1980 and then 30 years later make 100 widgets an hour for $25 an hour ($10 plus about $15 inflation, we're not talking inflation here). I would consider that a declining labor cost-- The labor cost per widget went from $1 per widget, to $0.25 ...

So, when I pay less or the same for a greater good, I consider that declining labor costs.

Aside: this illustrates a major flaw in the CPI, you cannot compare a 2013 TV to a 1960s tv to try and say "the price of a TV has deflated by X" ...

But what about those in Detroit (or wherever else) who actually build the cars? I wouldn't be surprised if they were feeling the downward spiral of wages vs cost of living/inflation.

Not that their loss is fueling cheap cars in my opinion, it seems the op doesn't believe that advances in technology can make things cheaper outside of labor costs I guess? I'd think that computers got on the whole much cheaper (and smaller/faster) due to the changes in the technology rather than the cost of actually assembling the hardware. But I guess I could be wrong and it could all be due to cheaper labor?

Edit: I also love the idea that a walk in the park/reading a book in the middle of the day/etc is somehow comparable to needing to find two different daycare slots for a child, not being able to plan or effectively work for a second source of income, or spend time with family/kids (since you're working morning and night). Seems like a fair trade off of time to me!

Improvement in CS/Electronics/MCU technology is a big contributing factor.

In India, We have a motor cycle called Bajaj Discover which gives amazing mileage. The innovation in mechanical engineering is very small, bulk of the innovation is timing of the spark plug firing controlled by a micro controller combined a engine design which functions per that intelligent design.

These sort of things were impossible even 20 years back, given the size, price and many other factors.

If you thinks that's what's responsible for cheap computers ... You know very little about computers ... I'm surprised you're even on HN.

Explain to me the source then. And maybe try to keep the contempt/insults to a minimum.

Technology has historically benefited workers, consumers, and investors in the long run. You may argue that those long term benefits are not worth the short term costs borne by those who lack the skills and/or opportunities to take advantage of the technology. In making any argument(s) against technology, it should always be remembered that if you do not take advantage of it, someone else will; and technology compounds, so the short term costs should be compared to compounding long term benefits.

"Technology has historically benefited workers, consumers, and investors in the long run."

For ~200 years, before which there were far less technology shifts and less market capitalism in general.

And just because something has been true for ~200 years doesn't mean it will continue being true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com