China

[hazard]

Dobro Indy sad vec banalizujes. Ako su ti sto slazu po rafovima tako vredni, sto rade za minimalac?I nisam rekao da su ispod radnickih kineskih u apsolutnom iznosu, nego relativnom. Verujem da je u Kini isto (da manje zaradjuje onaj u samoposluzi nego onaj u fabrici). Nije tu radnicku klasu ubila samo kompjuterizacija nego selidba proizvodnje u Kinu i druga mesta. Istina je da kada se zatvori fabrika u SAD koja zaposljava 10000 radnika, u Kini se otvori ekvivalentna fabrika koja zaposljava 5000 (kompjuterizacija, itd.). Samo sto u SAD onda bude nula radnika, iliti 10000 manje a ne 5000 manje.Sto se tice neukosti - to je relativan pojam. Recimo da si masinista nekakav u fabrici, dakle obavljas posao za koji je potrebna odredjena doza strucnosti i iskustva. I tako 20-25 godina. I onda ode tvoj posao u Kinu. Dzabe ti sva strucnost i iskustvo kada si outsource-ovan i kada nemas gde da radis. I nije te zamenio kompjuter, nego Kinez.

[Indy]

Autsorsovanje je i zbog pristupacnih Kineza (i Indijaca), a i zbog relativne neukosti radnistva zamenjenog posle IT-revolucije. Apsolutno me sad mrzi da guglam, ima o tome obilje clanaka.Inace, nesto mi puca prsluk za te koji slazu stvari po walmartima, tako da je moguce da "banalizujem". Neka fuckin' emigriraju na Novi Zeland. Kad sam ja mogao, mogu i oni. Nego, lenjo to bre, nece da radi (i nece da uci). Zato ih menja Kinez i Indijac.

[hazard]

Kinez i Indijac ih menja zato sto su jeftiniji. Full stop. Kinez koji je dosao iz neke ruralne zabiti da radi u Sangaju sigurno nije vise ucen nego americki radnik koga je zamenio. A Indijac programer je cesto gori od programera na zapadu cija je zamena.I ne razumem to, nece da radi i nece da uci. Kako to tacno treba uspesno da prekvalifikuje fabricki radnik u 40. ili 50. godini zivota?A drugo, ne vidim kako mogu svi u jednoj drzavi (ako ima vise od 5 miliona stanovnika, dakle ako je veca od Danske) da budu 'knowledge workers' i 'strucni radnici'. Sta to oni treba da rade? Nit takvih poslova ima dovoljno, nit svako ima kapacitet da ih obavlja.

Edited May 11, 2011 by hazard

[Indy]

Ima istine u tome sto pises, mada ne mislim da je bas tako clear cut... pozabavicu se time kasnije. Inace sam malocas citao neki americki sajt sa raspravom slicnom nasoj, pokusacu da iskopam link (zatvorio sam taj tab).

[eoten]

Dobro Indy sad vec banalizujes. Ako su ti sto slazu po rafovima tako vredni, sto rade za minimalac?...

A šta drugo da rade kada su poslovi koje bi mogli da rade emigrirali u Aziju? Nema veze plata u walmartu sa time da li je vredniji proizvodni i trgovački posao već je ponuda niskokvalifikovane radne snage opala pa je cena pala. Isti problem kao kod nas, za jedno radno mesto javljaju se desetine pa i stotine ljudi, poslodavci to koriste, cena takvog rada pada još više. Da se svi ti televizori, kompjuteri i automobili i dalje proizvode u USA imao bi i taj slagač rafova u bolju satnicu.

[rajka]

A šta drugo da rade kada su poslovi koje bi mogli da rade emigrirali u Aziju? Nema veze plata u walmartu sa time da li je vredniji proizvodni i trgovački posao već je ponuda niskokvalifikovane radne snage opala pa je cena pala. Isti problem kao kod nas, za jedno radno mesto javljaju se desetine pa i stotine ljudi, poslodavci to koriste, cena takvog rada pada još više. Da se svi ti televizori, kompjuteri i automobili i dalje proizvode u USA imao bi i taj slagač rafova u bolju satnicu.

da, samo kad bi se sve to proizvodilo u USA, za tu svoju satnicu bi mogao mnogo manje da kupi.

[Indy]

Btw, I ovde se regularno na konkurse javlja 100-tine ljudi, pa se cena rada nekako drziSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TBoneSteak]

da, samo kad bi se sve to proizvodilo u USA, za tu svoju satnicu bi mogao mnogo manje da kupi.

nema brines. umesto da proizvodi skupe stvari koje ne bi mogao da si priusti, on ce dok je nezaposlen diplomirati nanotehnologiju. its the american way :D

[Yoyogi]

Ponavljam raniji post za clanove Foruma koji su se kasnije ukljuculi u diskusiju pa ga mozda nisu videli. Navodno "robovski" rad u Kini.

Yugo se u Americi prodavao za 3,995$, tamo ga je stampa iskasapila ne samo sto je bio los auto nego sto je dolazio iz komunisticke zemlje koja tu cenu postize robovskim radom svoje radne snage.Da li je Kragujevac u istoriji imao bolje dane nego bas te kada je "robovao"?Sta bi danas dale desetine hiljada nezaposlenih da im se bar to "robovanje" vrati? Pa o tim danima sanjaju, haluciniraju.

[Yoyogi]

Samo da dodam, Yugo je tada isto toliko kostao i u SFRJ, to je bilo ~8,000DM. Nije davan ispod cene. Mozda je bio bolje uradjen za izvoz.

[hazard]

"Americki" jugici jesu bili bolji, secam se prica kako je svako trazio vezu u Zastavi da malo "cukne" neki od tih za Ameriku, pa da ih kao neispravne "skine sa trake" i pusti u domacu prodaju (gde bi, jelte, otisli odabranom kupcu). Btw, kad smo kod Kine, interesantan clanak u Economistu:http://www.economist.com./node/18682182

Multinational manufacturersMoving back to AmericaThe dwindling allure of building factories offshoreMay 12th 2011 | NEW YORK | from the print edition * *“WHEN clients are considering opening another manufacturing plant in China, I’ve started to urge them to consider alternative locations,” says Hal Sirkin of the Boston Consulting Group (BCG). “Have they thought about Vietnam, say? Or maybe [they could] even try Made in USA?” When clients are American firms looking to build factories to serve American customers, Mr Sirkin is increasingly likely to suggest they stay at home, not for patriotic reasons but because the economics of globalisation are changing fast.Labour arbitrage—taking advantage of lower wages abroad, especially in poor countries—has never been the only force pushing multinationals to locate offshore, but it has certainly played a big part. Now, however, as emerging economies boom, wages there are rising. Pay for factory workers in China, for example, soared by 69% between 2005 and 2010. So the gains from labour arbitrage are starting to shrink, in some cases to the point of irrelevance, according to a new study by BCG.“Sometime around 2015, manufacturers will be indifferent between locating in America or China for production for consumption in America,” says Mr Sirkin. That calculation assumes that wage growth will continue at around 17% a year in China but remain relatively slow in America, and that productivity growth will continue on current trends in both countries. It also assumes a modest appreciation of the yuan against the dollar.

The year 2015 is not far off. Factories take time to build, and can carry on cranking out widgets for years. So firms planning today for production tomorrow are increasingly looking close to home. BCG lists several examples of companies that have already brought plants and jobs back to America. Caterpillar, a maker of vehicles that dig, pull or plough, is shifting some of its excavator production from abroad to Texas. Sauder, an American furniture-maker, is moving production back home from low-wage countries. NCR has returned production of cash machines to Georgia (the American state, not the country that is occasionally invaded by Russia). Wham-O last year restored half of its Frisbee and Hula Hoop production to America from China and Mexico.BCG predicts a “manufacturing renaissance” in America. There are reasons to be sceptical. The surge of manufacturing output in the past year or so has largely been about recovering ground lost during the downturn. Moreover, some of the new factories in America have been wooed by subsidies that may soon dry up. But still, the new economics of labour arbitrage will make a difference.Rather than a stampede of plants coming home, “higher wages in China may cause some firms that were going to scale back in the US to keep their options open by continuing to operate a plant in America,” says Gary Pisano of Harvard Business School. The announcement on May 10th by General Motors (GM) that it will invest $2 billion to add up to 4,000 jobs at 17 American plants supports Mr Pisano’s point. GM is probably not creating many new jobs but keeping in America jobs that it might otherwise have exported.Even if wages in China explode, some multinationals will find it hard to bring many jobs back to America, argues Mr Pisano. In some areas, such as consumer electronics, America no longer has the necessary supplier base or infrastructure. Firms did not realise when they shifted operations to low-wage countries that some moves “would be almost irreversible”, says Mr Pisano.Many multinationals will continue to build most of their new factories in emerging markets, not to export stuff back home but because that is where demand is growing fastest. And companies from other rich countries will probably continue to enjoy the opportunity for labour arbitrage for longer than American ones, says Mr Sirkin. Their labour costs are higher than America’s and will remain so unless the euro falls sharply against the yuan. There’s no place like homeThe opportunity for labour arbitrage is disappearing fastest in basic manufacturing and in China. Other sectors and countries are less affected. As Pankaj Ghemawat, the author of “World 3.0”, points out, despite rapidly rising wages in India, its software and back-office offshoring industry is likely to retain its cost advantage for the foreseeable future, not least because of its rapid productivity growth.Nonetheless, a growing number of multinationals, especially from rich countries, are starting to see the benefits of keeping more of their operations close to home. For many products, labour is a small and diminishing fraction of total costs. And long, complex supply chains turn out to be riskier than many firms realised. When oil prices soar, transport grows dearer. When an epidemic such as SARS hits Asia or when an earthquake hits Japan, supply chains are disrupted. “There has been a definite shortening of supply chains, especially of those that had 30 or 40 processing steps,” says Mr Ghemawat.Firms are also trying to reduce their inventory costs. Importing from China to the United States may require a company to hold 100 days of inventory. That burden can be handily reduced if the goods are made nearer home (though that could be in Mexico rather than in America).Companies are thinking in more sophisticated ways about their supply chains. Bosses no longer assume that they should always make things in the country with the lowest wages. Increasingly, it makes sense to make things in a variety of places, including America.

[Yoyogi]

Btw, kad smo kod Kine, interesantan clanak u Economistu:http://www.economist.com./node/18682182

The year 2015 is not far off. Factories take time to build, and can carry on cranking out widgets for years. So firms planning today for production tomorrow are increasingly looking close to home. BCG lists several examples of companies that have already brought plants and jobs back to America. Caterpillar, a maker of vehicles that dig, pull or plough, is shifting some of its excavator production from abroad to Texas. Sauder, an American furniture-maker, is moving production back home from low-wage countries. NCR has returned production of cash machines to Georgia (the American state, not the country that is occasionally invaded by Russia). Wham-O last year restored half of its Frisbee and Hula Hoop production to America from China and Mexico.BCG predicts a “manufacturing renaissance” in America. There are reasons to be sceptical. The surge of manufacturing output in the past year or so has largely been about recovering ground lost during the downturn. Moreover, some of the new factories in America have been wooed by subsidies that may soon dry up. But still, the new economics of labour arbitrage will make a difference.Rather than a stampede of plants coming home, “higher wages in China may cause some firms that were going to scale back in the US to keep their options open by continuing to operate a plant in America,” says Gary Pisano of Harvard Business School. The announcement on May 10th by General Motors (GM) that it will invest $2 billion to add up to 4,000 jobs at 17 American plants supports Mr Pisano’s point. GM is probably not creating many new jobs but keeping in America jobs that it might otherwise have exported.Even if wages in China explode, some multinationals will find it hard to bring many jobs back to America, argues Mr Pisano. In some areas, such as consumer electronics, America no longer has the necessary supplier base or infrastructure. Firms did not realise when they shifted operations to low-wage countries that some moves “would be almost irreversible”, says Mr Pisano.Many multinationals will continue to build most of their new factories in emerging markets, not to export stuff back home but because that is where demand is growing fastest. And companies from other rich countries will probably continue to enjoy the opportunity for labour arbitrage for longer than American ones, says Mr Sirkin. Their labour costs are higher than America’s and will remain so unless the euro falls sharply against the yuan. There’s no place like homeThe opportunity for labour arbitrage is disappearing fastest in basic manufacturing and in China. Other sectors and countries are less affected. As Pankaj Ghemawat, the author of “World 3.0”, points out, despite rapidly rising wages in India, its software and back-office offshoring industry is likely to retain its cost advantage for the foreseeable future, not least because of its rapid productivity growth.Nonetheless, a growing number of multinationals, especially from rich countries, are starting to see the benefits of keeping more of their operations close to home. For many products, labour is a small and diminishing fraction of total costs. And long, complex supply chains turn out to be riskier than many firms realised. When oil prices soar, transport grows dearer. When an epidemic such as SARS hits Asia or when an earthquake hits Japan, supply chains are disrupted. “There has been a definite shortening of supply chains, especially of those that had 30 or 40 processing steps,” says Mr Ghemawat.Firms are also trying to reduce their inventory costs. Importing from China to the United States may require a company to hold 100 days of inventory. That burden can be handily reduced if the goods are made nearer home (though that could be in Mexico rather than in America).Companies are thinking in more sophisticated ways about their supply chains. Bosses no longer assume that they should always make things in the country with the lowest wages. Increasingly, it makes sense to make things in a variety of places, including America.

Cudi me da sagovornik u clanku ne zna dve vazne stvari ili prica uopsteno kada takvi "detalji" nisu bitni:Prvo: premestiti proizvodnju u Vjetnam? Ne moze. Moze ali ne moze da se iznese iz Vjetnama, nema "deep sea harbours". Nesto kao luka Bar, samo za manje brodove, kakvi oni sa 12 spratova kontejnera na njima. Laka roba, "nike-patike", to moze.Drugo: zarade u Kini koliko god da su porasle, produktivnost je porasla jos vise. Automatizacija i robotizacija, 90% japanske masine pa tako, radnici iako sa visim platama proizvode jos vise i jeftinije.Kako su pale cene racunara, laptopovi su sada 20% cene koju su imali pre 10 godina a zarade u Kini su se povecale 67%.Deo toga je opsti napredak tehnike ali bez drasticog povecanja produktivnosti ne bi cene tako mnogo pale.Ne secam se koji period je bio meren, mozda 2003-2008, zarade porasle 16% a produktivnost 25%. Edited May 20, 2011 by Yoyogi

[Eraserhead]

64 miliona stanova prazno

[noskich]

64 miliona stanova prazno

Zaostajes sa gradivom, postovao sam o ovome i TV reportazu i clanke vec nekoliko puta i prosle i tekuce godine. Edited July 20, 2011 by noskich

[Yoyogi]

64 miliona stanova prazno

Nista strasno. Drzava tako gradi. Cak su, u poredjenju sa paviljonima na Novom Beogradu, velelepni.22 miliona ljudi godisnje dolazi u radnu snagu, tih 64 miliona ce biti pojedeno za 3 godine.Praveci ih tako odjednom umesto kako kad ko hoce, verovatno je popust na materijalu i radu pokrio citavih 10 miliona stanova. Samo taj popust je ravan 4 puta celokupnom stambenom fondu Srbije.Pusti onaj shoder sa googlova i klipova.