RE: ply to Grant

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Tue Feb 12 2002 - 15:55:55 GMT

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: ply to Grant"

    Received: by id QAA15097 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:01:28 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <>
    Subject: RE: ply to Grant
    Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:55:55 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Feb 2002 15:55:55.0572 (UTC) FILETIME=[C153BF40:01C1B3DD]
    Precedence: bulk

    > <If the employees could get together and vote their stock
    >collectively, they could change just about any policy a company has.>
    > 'If' is the key word indeed.
    > 'outsourcing'
    > Ah, one of the many corporate euphemisms for jobcuts. It's a bit
    >like collatoral damage in military jargon.
    > Vincent
    You could also look at it as relocating the work to a new place. The people
    in that area are employed, too. We (you and I) are not just talking about
    job loss here. If someone else is able to do the job more cheaply and
    efficiently, why not give it to him/her instead? Do you want to freeze
    everyone into the jobs they now hold? That should bring the evolution of
    manufacturing and production to a screeching halt.

    They'd better get rid of all the robots making cars, too. Ten or more
    people could be filling the job of each robot. Cars could cost as much as a
    hundred thousand dollars each. Now that's progress! Perhaps the Japanese
    should be castigated for building the Lexus with only 50 workers in their
    automated factory. And the robots aren't even getting paid a salary! Now
    there's slave labor for you.

    I notice you seem to look at every social change in a negative light.
    Comparing outsourcing with collateral damage by a military organization, for
    example. That's what I call hyperbolic propaganda. The times they are
    achangin'. Better get used to it.

    We (all of us) are living in a global economy because that's what we
    (humanity) have evolved to. The number of people inhabiting the earth and
    the civilization they have built requires it. Kill off a few billion people
    and we (humanity) can go back to living in a simpler culture. Kill of
    enough, and our species can go back to fighting our wars by throwing rocks
    at each other. But no matter how many people die, I don't think we can undo
    the path of evolution we have trod this far. The fewer people would still
    drive cars, use computers, robots and other machines, and find more
    efficient ways to manufacture their goods. The loss of people would not get
    rid of all the memes we've acquired. They're stored in libraries.


    Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger:

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 12 2002 - 16:10:46 GMT