Reply #80: India and China are catching up, no disrespect [View All]

The point I'm making is that the basic model you put forth only allows for "catching up" and the next step--a sustainable, decent standard of living requires a shift from the low-labor, low tax, pro-business model to a more worker-friendly, knowlege-and-craft friendly model.

Unskilled and even semi-skilled labor will always be poorly valued and transient. Not that autoworkers are unskilled, but the fact is that today's factories can produce more and better cars with fewer workers than they could 20 years ago. That trend is not going to turn around. It is true for most any manufacturing job. The history of the industrial revolution is not finished. It quickly made the profession of farmer a shrinking trade, but opened the doors of factories building tractors, combines, etc. For decades now, accelerated by advances in computers/robotics, factories have become less and less labor intensive. The new employment doors aren't fully apparent, but I'm guessing more knowlege work, more crafts, more service.

Chasing after the factory job lost to developing countries where the populace is currently willing to undercut (barely) the cost of a robotic facility is not good strategy. Selling out our standards of living to maintain a "business-friendly" environment is just wrong. We need to look to the future where uniquely human abilities are valued--that is almost the opposite of your description of a globally competitive state.