It is with an altered way of living. It was with people 100 years ago who were far poorer. Only problem was, they lived simply...and we have all but forgotten how to do that.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Bass manufacturer ethics?
- Thread starter JoshuaTSP
- Start date
It is with an altered way of living. It was with people 100 years ago who were far poorer. Only problem was, they lived simply...and we have all but forgotten how to do that.
We're all sitting here on computers, and yet computers are some of the most ethically problematic products out there.
For example:
... and the fact is I couldn't do many of the things I do musically without my computers, affordable recording gear and mics, and so on and so on. The big solution isn't just about choosing one brand of another, it would require a lot of people to think critically about their spending habits and not overconsuming - electronics, clothes, instruments, cars, all of it.
I agree with previous posters that buying used is the most realistic and easy solution - as far as the ethics of consuption go - and scratch-built is the only way to be really sure about the ethics of production, but that's not likely to be an option for me anytime soon.
For example:
... and the fact is I couldn't do many of the things I do musically without my computers, affordable recording gear and mics, and so on and so on. The big solution isn't just about choosing one brand of another, it would require a lot of people to think critically about their spending habits and not overconsuming - electronics, clothes, instruments, cars, all of it.
I agree with previous posters that buying used is the most realistic and easy solution - as far as the ethics of consuption go - and scratch-built is the only way to be really sure about the ethics of production, but that's not likely to be an option for me anytime soon.
No offence or anything, but it does make me smile when people think products manufactured in their own country are better than imports with no basis other than blind patriotism.
I'm just as guilty TBH, I have though of British being best.
I shouldn't have said "Buy American." I actually meant buying goods from companies paying a fair wage to workers. I wasn't really making a statement about the quality of the goods in question.
Everybody makes some good stuff and everybody makes some crap - no exceptions. Fact is, unless you have the time and resources to investigate every purchase you make, it's really hard to make a strong stand on this. That said, I don't think any country has had its manufacturing base decimated like the US has, and everybody is at fault - with greed being the common denominator.
Here are a couple of paragraphs from an article in Bloomberg today about the computer industry, once strongly held in the USA. Another example of an industry focussing on competitive labour cost in the drive for more profitability.
The musical instrument manufacturing sector is no different. Building up these manufacturing facilities enable them to finance retooling and developing expertise in these fields. The brutal reality is that the US is uncompetitive in mass producing musical instruments. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a discussion item.
A bit of a diversion, but it speaks to several comments about overseas production. This is not meant to be political at all. Just sharing an eye opener.
.................
U.S. Versus China
Today, manufacturing employment in the U.S. computer industry is about 166,000 -- lower than it was before the first personal computer, the MITS Altair 2800, was assembled in 1975. Meanwhile, a very effective computer-manufacturing industry has emerged in Asia, employing about 1.5 million workers -- factory employees, engineers and managers.
The largest of these companies is Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., also known as Foxconn. The company has grown at an astounding rate, first in Taiwan and later in China. Its revenue last year was $62 billion, larger than Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp., Dell Inc. or Intel. Foxconn employs more than 800,000 people, more than the combined worldwide head count of Apple, Dell, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard Co., Intel and Sony Corp.
10-to-1 Ratio
Until a recent spate of suicides at Foxconns giant factory complex in Shenzhen, China, few Americans had heard of the company. But most know the products it makes: computers for Dell and HP, Nokia Oyj cell phones, Microsoft Xbox 360 consoles, Intel motherboards, and countless other familiar gadgets. Some 250,000 Foxconn employees in southern China produce Apples products. Apple, meanwhile, has about 25,000 employees in the U.S. -- that means for every Apple worker in the U.S. there are 10 people in China working on iMacs, iPods and iPhones. The same roughly 10-to-1 relationship holds for Dell, disk-drive maker Seagate Technology, and other U.S. tech companies.
You could say, as many do, that shipping jobs overseas is no big deal because the high-value work -- and much of the profits -- remain in the U.S. That may well be so. But what kind of a society are we going to have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work -- and masses of unemployed?
Since the early days of Silicon Valley, the money invested in companies has increased dramatically, only to produce fewer jobs. Simply put, the U.S. has become wildly inefficient at creating American tech jobs. We may be less aware of this growing inefficiency, however, because our history of creating jobs over the past few decades has been spectacular -- masking our greater and greater spending to create each position.
The musical instrument manufacturing sector is no different. Building up these manufacturing facilities enable them to finance retooling and developing expertise in these fields. The brutal reality is that the US is uncompetitive in mass producing musical instruments. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a discussion item.
A bit of a diversion, but it speaks to several comments about overseas production. This is not meant to be political at all. Just sharing an eye opener.
.................
U.S. Versus China
Today, manufacturing employment in the U.S. computer industry is about 166,000 -- lower than it was before the first personal computer, the MITS Altair 2800, was assembled in 1975. Meanwhile, a very effective computer-manufacturing industry has emerged in Asia, employing about 1.5 million workers -- factory employees, engineers and managers.
The largest of these companies is Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., also known as Foxconn. The company has grown at an astounding rate, first in Taiwan and later in China. Its revenue last year was $62 billion, larger than Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp., Dell Inc. or Intel. Foxconn employs more than 800,000 people, more than the combined worldwide head count of Apple, Dell, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard Co., Intel and Sony Corp.
10-to-1 Ratio
Until a recent spate of suicides at Foxconns giant factory complex in Shenzhen, China, few Americans had heard of the company. But most know the products it makes: computers for Dell and HP, Nokia Oyj cell phones, Microsoft Xbox 360 consoles, Intel motherboards, and countless other familiar gadgets. Some 250,000 Foxconn employees in southern China produce Apples products. Apple, meanwhile, has about 25,000 employees in the U.S. -- that means for every Apple worker in the U.S. there are 10 people in China working on iMacs, iPods and iPhones. The same roughly 10-to-1 relationship holds for Dell, disk-drive maker Seagate Technology, and other U.S. tech companies.
You could say, as many do, that shipping jobs overseas is no big deal because the high-value work -- and much of the profits -- remain in the U.S. That may well be so. But what kind of a society are we going to have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work -- and masses of unemployed?
Since the early days of Silicon Valley, the money invested in companies has increased dramatically, only to produce fewer jobs. Simply put, the U.S. has become wildly inefficient at creating American tech jobs. We may be less aware of this growing inefficiency, however, because our history of creating jobs over the past few decades has been spectacular -- masking our greater and greater spending to create each position.
