Screw 'em if they hate us
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 1, 2008 09:13
VIEWED: 19860
PAGE 25 of 30
FREM:
Quote:1) I bang the factory-slave or plantation-slave image in my head against the image of the millions who flock to Walmart and I don't see much "basic" humanity there. Wish I could. It's not a factor I'd want an entire economic system to depend on.
Economies of Scale.There's that, but it doesn't account for the basic humanity of people, and quality control does fall off at certain levels of production.
2) AFA quality control: Quality control is a measure of how consistent a product is, not whether it is more durable or better engineered or more useful, and I've never seen a relationship between mass production and quality control. In fact. I've seen the reverse of what you propose: slider valves drilled by hand in India failed at a phenomenal rate compared to slider valves drilled robotically. Same for boards assembled by hand v robotically, etc. So I can't say there is an automatic connection either way between QC and produciton size.
I';m gonna have to duck out of this discussion for a few days. I've spent way too much time here, and I have a very busy schedule to keep.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thank you SignyM, that's what I wanted to know. No need to flesh it out in detail on my behalf, I just got confused about your standpoint on corporations because you seemed to be contradicting yourself, but you've cleared it up now.
------------------------------
This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This from The Strawman? I'm gonna point to China. I'm pretty sure they make fMRIs... I know they make equally complex technology (supercomputers, jets etc)... and they are mostly non-corporate. There are other entities, like universities and cooperatives that have the capacity to make fMRIs because they have the capacity to make technologies that are equally or more complex, but don't happen to be in that business. (For example, the fastest supercomputers are usually built by governments or government/ university collaboration, and the human genome was sequenced by a group of non-profits.)
I'd prefer it if none of us had to. I'd prefer that we not get caught up in the game of tit for tat insult that Rue's so good at initiating. I'd prefer straight answers to questions rather than deceit, dissembling, or insult. Heck, I'd prefer for you or Rue to specify a non-corporate source for an FMRI.
So I've answered your question: It IS possible to build highly complex machines/ technologies w/o corporations. I can point to non-corporate entities that create and mass produce complex technologies and I can point to theoretical alternatives to corporations.
Now, I'm sure you'll strawman my argument to death, and at some future time I'll bird-dog each of your points until you disappear, but right now I'm too busy to go chasing after this.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My employer - a small private company, 16 employees total - builds machines for geophysical research that are quite complex. Not fMRIs, but comparable. We don't control the market or buy out politicians, neither do we need special legal rights. We just build shit and sell it.
You want an fMRI? With enough startup cash, you can buy the lab equipment, hire an expert to set down the design, and bring in a handful of technicians to do the handiwork. No evil corporationness needed.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Rather than trot thru the usdual dynamic of people proposing ideas and you (Geezer) nitpicking, strawmanning and caviling from the sidelines, I suggest that you tell us: What specific aspects of corporations make them necessary for complex technological production? Just to get you going with some ideas, I would wonder: Is it their size? Ability to accumulate capital? Inventiveness?
Now, I'm sure you'll strawman my argument to death, and at some future time I'll bird-dog each of your points until you disappear, but right now I'm too busy to go chasing after this.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I'm gonna point to China. I'm pretty sure they make fMRIs
True. Chinese companies owned by corporations like Philips, G.E., Siemens, Medtronic, etc. make MRIs and other medical equipment.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_19/b4083032420969.htm?
chan=magazine+channel_news
Quote:
... I know they make equally complex technology (supercomputers, jets etc)... and they are mostly non-corporate.
Most of China's airlines use Boeing, Airbus, and other outsourced planes. They have just started their first commercial design, the ARJ21, manufactured by the China Aviation Industry Corporation I. Hmmm. Corporation.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1670256,00.html
Quote:
There are other entities, like universities and cooperatives that have the capacity to make fMRIs because they have the capacity to make technologies that are equally or more complex, but don't happen to be in that business.
They might make them for their own use, but how do I get one?
Quote:
So I've answered your question: It IS possible to build highly complex machines/ technologies w/o corporations. I can point to non-corporate entities that create and mass produce complex technologies and I can point to theoretical alternatives to corporations.
Actually, you haven't answered my question. I don't care if it's theoretically possible that some university or government could build an FMRI. I don't care if a million monkeys in a room with components could eventually assemble one. How do I, right now, without having to either be a government or a university, get (You know, buy and have delivered to my house) an FMRI, absent a corporate structure to manufacture it or it's components?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
[BWhat specific aspects of corporations make them necessary for complex technological production? Just to get you going with some ideas, I would wonder: Is it their size? Ability to accumulate capital? Inventiveness?
Nothing makes corporations necessary, just like nothing makes democracy necessary, or pizza necessary. Corporations are just generally more successful at producing a wide range of products that meet consumer demand at lower prices. I'm sure there are examples of successful cooperatives, but the vast majority of goods and services that most folk in the developed world use are provided by corporations. Economic Darwinism perhaps?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You appreantly do not understand my answer. You don't have to be a government or university to "get" an fMRI, you can prolly buy one (or indeed many complex technologies) from nationalized industries - which are not corporations in my sense of the word. I'm going to say "probably" because I haven't looked up fMRI specifically, but it is no different that buying a commercial jet (China Aviation Industries, Airbus) or a nuclear power plant (CanDU from Canada for example). Now, if you're going to stick on fMRIs as the ONLY complex technology that can be discussed then I'm going to say you're being a dick.
without having to either be a government or a university
So, since I've answered your question, will you answer mine? What is it about corporations that is necessary for complex technological production?
-----------------
OK. I see we xposted.
Okay, so corporations aren't necessary. That's good to hear. Now, the question is, does their utility in some areas (cheap production) balance their dis-utility in other areas (impoverishing all of their workers, causing economic busts thru concentration of capital)? Are there ways to get the upsides of corporations w/o the downsides?
Also, I point to the roughly 4 billion people for whom corporations are NOT a major player.
One more comment b4 I leave for a while: You said that communism required a government and that therefore economic and government entities were identical or at least strongly linked under communism. Apparently you do not know your communist theory! In theory, under communism the state is supposed to "wither away". Ironically, the early proponents of communism saw "the state" as being an organ of oppression, pretty much like today's libertarians.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Economic Darwinism perhaps?
Possibly, but it's also possible they maintain their clout through government fiat. In any case, if they're worthwhile companies they should be able to survive without special rules in their favor. I'm not really with the people who want to see corporations 'brought to heel'. I just want them to play by the same rules as the rest of us.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME