Hacker News Reader

Comment by hooo | Hacker News Reader

Why don't we have foreign workers temporarily come and do this cheaply then?

The money isn't going to the workers.

Pay what it costs for people to live good lives

Labor for public projects is so messed up that we basically can’t build anything without paying 10-100x what China would pay to do it. Eventually we simply get economically outcompeted, or maybe we invent robots to make the projects feasible again.

> or maybe we invent robots to make the projects feasible again.

In the introductory, "disruption" phase it will come in at about half the current cost. Then, once the current market and expertise has been destroyed, they can rack-in maximum profit by jacking up their prices, with added, predatory inconveniences, such as "cleaning costs".

That’s because China is an authoritarian dictatorship that uses forced labor. That’s who you’re pining to be.

It really isn’t. I’m as big a critic of China as anyone, but assuming its workers are all slaves who aren’t advancing up the tech chain is really dangerous, very stupid.

I didn’t say all labor was forced, I said they use forced labor. Which they do. Your middle of the road ultra-orthodoxy is the dangerous attitude here.

China doesn’t use forced labor for anything important. It’s mostly just a more extreme version of work in American prisons, although they focus more on the re-education than work aspect (it sounds like a good thing, but it isn’t). The people building bridges, viaducts, and tunnels, are not forced, are actually getting really skilled at it. China could stop all liaojiao and laogai tomorrow and virtually nothing would change about this.

What if you have to make the actual choice of paying them what can be afforded ir not paying at all?

Your dreams of having slaves are so revealing

There may have been a typo but your reading comprehension seems pretty horrible. Let me rephrase.

The choice is never between "Pay what it costs for people to live good lives" and paying less than that. The choice is between paying what the company can afford or having no job at all.

I'd prefer everyone be making enough money to buy a 2000 sqft house and groceries with enough left over for leisure but that option isn't on the table.

It’s not on the table because you don’t want it. That’s it.

Company A makes Widget for $20. It takes 1 Employee B hour to make a Widget. Widgets cost Company A $8 to manufacture. After accounting for management overhead, logistics and the cost of storage, Company A clears $10 per widget. Company A can only afford to pay Employee B $10 to break even, this is not a living wage.

In this scenario, you'd prefer Widgets not exist and Employee B not have a job.

Since you're going to say, "Raise the price of Widgets!". $20 is the ideal price point for product, any more or less and the volume sold * profit falls and the possible wage for Employee B will drop.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com