My comment is:
1. Don't blame the Chinese
Job Loss is the main issue here, but I got to say, if goods and services were sold at cheaper price, wouldn't the society now have more buying power to buy other things? Wouldn't cheaper steel or cheaper food allows people to focus more on creating more stuff and better stuff?
So if this is the case it means that those that are harmed by the Chinese have been producing products that are not contributive to productivity of the economy.
Ofcourse this is a generalization but lets face it, more satisfied demands should contribute to more productivity in the economy. Or won't they?
Then don't blame the Chinese for being able to satisfy consumers' demands better, blame the consumers for demanding non productive goods/services. Blame the consumers for not investing in local productivity especially after having access to the cheaper solutions from the Chinese.
This is a calling for all local entrepreneurs where the people consumed Chinese products, there are big new opportunities available in their market now, as low end families are now able to meet their needs better. Don't slip these opportunities to the Chinese again.
2. Proposing Solution
So my solution to this problem would be, to create laws that requires companies to give back to local initiators of demand.
Let me explain:
- Say in a country village somewhere people are living without refrigerators, they have to finish all of their veggies because they couldn't store it overnight. Now, an Indonesian came to the place noticed this and started to sell refrigerators. At first they refused to use the thing because they thought it came from evil spirits, but then after a few dangerous venture to convince their elders, the Indonesian managed to convince them that the Refrigerators were harmless. And so the demand went crazy high.
After a while one of the villagers heard that the Chinese had cheaper Refrigerators available, so he called them up and told them about the country/village.
The Chinese came and sold them cheaper fridges. The Indonesian worried that he would be forced out of business. But then the chief villager had an idea, the Chinese are now required to pay the Indonesian some form of royalties for every sales of fridges that they had made, because the Indonesian were recognized as the "Initiator of demand of Refrigerators" of that community.
My argument for this system is, once there aren't any demand, then they were. Those who worked for the creation of that demand are sources of solutions and deserve to be given thanks or rewards.
So in the end its up to the people or consumers to decide, who to take care of, people who sell products that contributed to their productivity, or people who sell products that only good for their temporary enjoyment.
1. Don't blame the Chinese
Job Loss is the main issue here, but I got to say, if goods and services were sold at cheaper price, wouldn't the society now have more buying power to buy other things? Wouldn't cheaper steel or cheaper food allows people to focus more on creating more stuff and better stuff?
So if this is the case it means that those that are harmed by the Chinese have been producing products that are not contributive to productivity of the economy.
Ofcourse this is a generalization but lets face it, more satisfied demands should contribute to more productivity in the economy. Or won't they?
Then don't blame the Chinese for being able to satisfy consumers' demands better, blame the consumers for demanding non productive goods/services. Blame the consumers for not investing in local productivity especially after having access to the cheaper solutions from the Chinese.
This is a calling for all local entrepreneurs where the people consumed Chinese products, there are big new opportunities available in their market now, as low end families are now able to meet their needs better. Don't slip these opportunities to the Chinese again.
2. Proposing Solution
So my solution to this problem would be, to create laws that requires companies to give back to local initiators of demand.
Let me explain:
- Say in a country village somewhere people are living without refrigerators, they have to finish all of their veggies because they couldn't store it overnight. Now, an Indonesian came to the place noticed this and started to sell refrigerators. At first they refused to use the thing because they thought it came from evil spirits, but then after a few dangerous venture to convince their elders, the Indonesian managed to convince them that the Refrigerators were harmless. And so the demand went crazy high.
After a while one of the villagers heard that the Chinese had cheaper Refrigerators available, so he called them up and told them about the country/village.
The Chinese came and sold them cheaper fridges. The Indonesian worried that he would be forced out of business. But then the chief villager had an idea, the Chinese are now required to pay the Indonesian some form of royalties for every sales of fridges that they had made, because the Indonesian were recognized as the "Initiator of demand of Refrigerators" of that community.
My argument for this system is, once there aren't any demand, then they were. Those who worked for the creation of that demand are sources of solutions and deserve to be given thanks or rewards.
So in the end its up to the people or consumers to decide, who to take care of, people who sell products that contributed to their productivity, or people who sell products that only good for their temporary enjoyment.
No comments:
Post a Comment